Talk:Egyptair

Proposed move

Move complete.

Rationale

EgyptAir is now using the CamelCase naming as opposed to the earlier Egyptair. The change can be seen on their website. EdwinHJ | Talk

Horribly Inaccurate Facts

The Maltese Egypt air incident is horribly inaccurate, the hi-jackers did not storm the plane but shot anyone who tried to escape the plane and used a powerful explosive on the plane thus killing the passengers instead of aprehanding the terrorists, they killed more passangers that the terrorists. Please correct the inaccurate fact, I live in the country myself don’t tell me you have a good source. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.85.104.106 (talk) 21:48, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Discussion/Comments

• Support EdwinHJ | Talk 03:25, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

Why no mention of EgyptAir's famous incident?

I am referring to the air crash a few years ago. —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 21:44, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

hey which crash? the one of tunisia?

Airline Fleetsize

EgyptAir is not second largest anymore. Both Egyptair and South African Airways have the fleetsize as of current (49 planes both). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.100.218.127 (talk) 04:50, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

WARNING! Violation of WP:OR

This article is in violation of WP:OR. This article may have some of its information deleted without further notice. WP:OR is a wikipedian policy which works in conjuctions with WP:V. All Encyclopedic content must be verifiable (as stated just above every edit summary). The table within this article makes reference IATA code of EgyptAir being "MS". However it does not provide sufficience reference to investigate this finding. There is a link to IATA however, further investigation into this self referencing wikipedia link does not provide any information or a corelation with the term MS. As per wikipedian policy, aggreed upon by general concensus, this information must be removed. I have previously given this article a warning by adding {{fact}}, however this was removed. Consider this your final warning to provide reliable sources. --CyclePat 21:04, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I have just been threathen with a block from user User talk:Dethme0w in regards to EgyptAir and feel I can no longer debate this issue. He has consider the fact that I added "Citation required" as disruptive. I have posted my concerns at the WP:ANI board and the WP:Reliable sources Noticeboard and this is my final post regarding this item. We have not found any reliable sources, we could not work together, and we disagreed upon the fundamental wikipedia rules elaborated within WP:OR and WP:V which states "Encyclopedic content must be verifiable." We are still left wondering where this information comes from and I believe the article is not properly sourced. Unfortunatelly, I feel as though I can no longer safely debate this issue from feer of being blocked. Finally, I would like to express my final concerns and warning to future readers in regards to the information within this article. Beware and be diligent to make sure your references are included! --CyclePat 22:22, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Uh, instead of boldly waltzing in, declaring your intentions, how about helping out and sourcing? :) spryde | talk 00:14, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I have done my part :) spryde | talk 01:04, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

History section removed in its entireity

The history section as in this edit, [1], has been completely removed as it is blatant WP:COPYVIO of http://www.fundinguniverse.com/company-histories/EgyptAir-Company-History.html --Russavia ^Dialogue 22:01, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Destinations

Link to Egyptair Destinations does not work

213.121.200.9 (talk) 14:09, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Added Montreal to list of destinations as it has been resumed in 2009 after being suspended for budget problems. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/article396669.ece —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.196.167.91 (talk) 08:45, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

It has not resumed in 2009. The first three words of the cited article are: "Starting June 10"! Jasepl (talk) 10:11, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Accidents

An editor recently removed two accidents from the "Incidents and accidents" section of the article. One is a Misrair accident and the other is an Egypt Air accident. Both are mentioned in the List of accidents and incidents involving the Vickers Viscount. I've readded them to the article. The Misrair accident should be included until such time as Misrair is converted from a redirect into a stand-alone article. Mjroots (talk) 12:19, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Mobile site

http://91.204.216.75/ is the direct IP address for the mobile site WhisperToMe (talk) 04:51, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Egyptair incident in Geneva reports

• German: http://www.bfu.admin.ch/common/pdf/1135_d.pdf (original) - http://www.webcitation.org/65XHPA2Wd
• French: http://www.bfu.admin.ch/common/pdf/1135_f.pdf - http://www.webcitation.org/65XHVXxHO

WhisperToMe (talk) 04:25, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

==Egyptair cockpit fire reports

• English: http://www.civilaviation.gov.eg/accident/Reports/B777_SU-GBP_cockpit_fire_accident final Report responding to boeing comments 19-09-2012a.pdf - http://www.webcitation.org/6CZREhnjG

WhisperToMe (talk) 22:04, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Archived references not used in the article

2010s

• "EgyptAir looks to expand its way out of intensive care in 2013". Centre for Aviation. 20 March 2014. Archived 30 December 2014 at the Wayback Machine
• "EgyptAir grows its hub role, expanding 60% in Africa as European tourism slowly recovers". Centre for Aviation. 14 June 2013. Archived from the original on 17 January 2014.
• Gubisch, Michael (14 January 2013). "IN FOCUS: EgyptAir M&E in recovery after 2011 regime change". Flightglobal. London. Archived from the original on 14 December 2013.
• Kaminski-Morrow, David (30 November 2012). "EgyptAir 777 fire probe inconclusive but short-circuit suspected". Flightglobal. London. Archived from the original on 14 December 2013.
• Hamlin, George (27 June 2012). "Yankee Alpha Takes to the Skies...Again". Air Transport World. Archived from the original on 16 January 2014.
• Kaminski-Morrow, David (11 June 2012). "IATA: Stability key to Egyptian tourism lift – minister". Flightglobal. Beijing. Archived from the original on 14 December 2013. {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |trans_title= (help)
• Hofmann, Kurt (13 April 2012). "EgyptAir reports 75% profit decrease for 2011, eyes new routes in 2013". Air Transport World. Archived from the original on 16 January 2014.
• "EgyptAir eyes return to profitability and capacity growth in 2012". Centre for Aviation. 20 June 2011. Archived from the original on 17 January 2014.
• "EgyptAir seat occupancy down 50%". Egypt Independent. 13 July 2011. Archived from the original on 18 January 2014.
• Kaminski-Morrow, David (21 March 2011). "EgyptAir plots return to normal by summer end". Flightglobal. London. Archived from the original on 14 December 2013.
• Kaminski-Morrow, David (1 March 2011). "EgyptAir aims to restore normality by end of summer". Flightglobal. London. Archived from the original on 16 January 2014.
• Kaminski-Morrow, David (1 March 2011). "EgyptAir in talks to defer A330-300 deliveries". Flightglobal. London. Archived from the original on 14 December 2013.
• Dunn, Graham (22 February 2011). "Carriers take the pain as unrest spreads". Flightglobal. London. Archived from the original on 14 December 2013.
• Kaminski-Morrow, David (21 February 2011). "Embattled EgyptAir to offer a third of its fleet for lease". Flightglobal. London. Archived from the original on 14 December 2013.
• "Egyptair MRO arm to become authorised Embraer centre". Flightglobal. 1 February 2011. Archived from the original on 14 December 2013.
• Sobie, Brendan (18 May 2010). "EgyptAir eyes Chicago, Toronto and Washington with new 777-300ERs". Flightglobal. São Paulo. Archived from the original on 14 December 2013.
• Hofmann, Kurt (12 April 2016). "Egyptair to boost Saudi Arabian network to 200 weekly flights". Air Transport World. Archived from the original on 15 April 2016. Egyptair chairman and CEO Hisham El-Nahas said the routes with added frequencies are Jeddah, Riydah, [sic] Madina and Damam.

--Jetstreamer ^Talk 15:28, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

2000s

• "ExIm Bank backs aircraft loan for EgyptAir". Flightglobal. 27 August 2009. Archived from the original on 14 December 2013.
• "EgyptAir identified as 777-300ER customer". Flightglobal. 1 September 2008. Archived from the original on 16 January 2014.
• Moores, Victoria (24 September 2007). "Egyptair to join Star Alliance". Flightglobal. Archived from the original on 16 January 2014.
• "EgyptAir Express takes E-170". Flightglobal. 22 May 2007. Archived from the original on 14 December 2013.
• Doyle, Andrew (15 May 2007). "Picture: EgyptAir Express receives first Embraer 170 regional jet". Flightglobal. Singapore. Archived from the original on 14 December 2013.
• "EgyptAir unveils new division". Flightglobal. 26 September 2006. Archived from the original on 16 January 2014.
• Buyck, Cathy (28 February 2006). "Cairo teams with Fraport to develop hub strategy". Air Transport World. Archived from the original on 16 January 2014.
• "EgyptAir moves to simplify fleet". Flightglobal. 12 August 2003. Archived from the original on 15 December 2013.
• "EgyptAir and BA deal blow to P&W A318". Flightglobal. 17 December 2002. Archived from the original on 15 December 2013.
• "Egypt acts to lift morale and restructure at national carrier". Flightglobal. 25 June 2002. Archived from the original on 15 December 2013.
• "Death toll tops 270 in three crashes". Flightglobal. 14 May 2002. Archived from the original on 15 December 2013.

--Jetstreamer ^Talk 15:32, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

1990s

• "All the sevens for EgyptAir". Flightglobal. 4 June 1997. Archived from the original on 14 December 2013.
• "IAE selected". Flightglobal. 2 October 1996. Archived from the original on 16 January 2014.
• "Aircraft News". Flightglobal. 1 October 1996. Archived from the original on 16 January 2014. International Lease Finance Corporation has selected V2500 engines from International Aero Engines to power its seven A319s, A320s and A321s, while Egyptair's four A321s will also be powered by V2500s.
• "Egyptair converts". Flightglobal. 18 September 1996. Archived from the original on 16 January 2014.
• "Aircraft news". Flightglobal. 1 August 1996. Archived from the original on 16 January 2014. Egyptair's additional order for three Boeing 777s is for delivery between May and August 1997.
• "Aircraft news". Flightglobal. 1 May 1996. Archived from the original on 16 January 2014. Egyptair has selected the PW4090 engine to power its three B777-200s.
• "Aircraft news". Flightglobal. 1 October 1995. Archived from the original on 16 January 2014. Egyptair has ordered three Boeing 737-200s as part of its fleet modernisation programme.
• Endres, Gunter (9 August 1995). "Boeing climbs back on top in jet-airliner orders competition". Flightglobal. London. Archived from the original on 14 December 2013.
• "Pyramids in the sky". Flightglobal. 1 July 1995. Archived from the original on 14 December 2013.

--Jetstreamer ^Talk 01:31, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

MS 990

• Campbell, Duncan (16 March 2002). "Revenge drove pilot to crash plane, killing 217". The Guardian. Los Angeles. Archived from the original on 16 January 2014.

--Jetstreamer ^Talk 19:06, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Key people

@Captain fawzy: Here's the diff where I added a reference for the new CEO. Add a better source if you have one. Please stop modifying the article with unsourced claims.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 10:23, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 February 2015

key_people =

• Captain Sameh El Hefny (Chairman & CEO of EgyptAir Holding Company)
• Captain Hisham El Nahas (Chairman of EgyptAir Airlines)

Egyptair Ecommerce Department.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Egyptair Ecommerce (talk • contribs)

I don't see you providing a source supporting the changes. That's precisely the reason the article has been semi-protected.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 10:23, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Unsupported changes

@Anup: This [2] edit is at least partly unsupported by the references provided. More specifically, <ref name="EgyptAir plans further restructuring as losses mount. But outlook may brighten as Egypt stabilises" /> only supports the CEO position for El Hefny. I had previously requested protection of the page because of additions of unsupported changes. The source for El Nahas seems to be fine. According to WP:BURDEN, I will require that you add the proper source to the changes you made for the positions held by El Hefny.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 17:20, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Contradictory and confusing text

The text says that the airline renamed itself "United Arab Airlines" in both February 1957 and March 1958. Which is true? Also, it mentions the airline losing a Viscount at Almaza airport during an air raid, but does not make clear when the air raid occurred. Was it during the 1956 Suez Crisis – and, if so, why isn't it mentioned in that context? – or at another time? Mdnavman (talk) 18:22, 28 November 2015 (UTC)mdnavman

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on EgyptAir. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140625124551/http://www.egyptairplus.com/MS_Member_WebSite/frequent.jsp to http://www.egyptairplus.com/MS_Member_WebSite/frequent.jsp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:05, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 41 external links on EgyptAir. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150607142523/http://www.staralliance.com:80/en/about/airlines/egyptair_airlines/ to http://www.staralliance.com/en/about/airlines/egyptair_airlines/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.flightglobal.com/FlightPDFArchive/1938/1938 - 1198.PDF
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150424171656/http://express.egyptair.com/AboutUs/History.aspx to http://express.egyptair.com/AboutUs/History.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140318184039/http://www.egyptindependent.com/news/egyptair-flight-attendants-fly-hijab-first-time to http://www.egyptindependent.com/news/egyptair-flight-attendants-fly-hijab-first-time
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.egyptair.com/NewPages/Reports/2011-2012/holding/index.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110201073738/http://www.aaco.org/airlines_egypt.asp to http://www.aaco.org/airlines_egypt.asp
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.airsafe.com/flt990.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://casa.gov.au/fsa/2002/jul/9-11.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://atwonline.com/airframes/egyptair-agrees-buy-eight-boeing-737ngs
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1963/1963 - 0564.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1963/1963 - 0568.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1965/1965 - 1086.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1968/1968 - 2455.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1970/1970 - 0558.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1971/1971 - 1220.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1971/1971 - 2249.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1972/1972 - 0630.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1972/1972 - 3311.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1973/1973 - 0314.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1973/1973 - 2971.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1974/1974 - 1045.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1974/1974 - 1674.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1974/1974 - 1721.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1977/1977 - 0057.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1933/1933 - 1270.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1936/1936 - 0047.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1936/1936 - 0723.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1939/1939 - 1264.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1951/1951 - 2302.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1954/1954 - 0906.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1956/1956 - 0475.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1957/1957 - 1113.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1960/1960 - 0842.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1960/1960 - 2787.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1961/1961 - 0927.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1961/1961 - 0100.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1961/1961 - 0504.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1960/1960 - 0504.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1960/1960 - 0505.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1960/1960 - 2252.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1960/1960 - 2255.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:08, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Planespotters is not a reliable source

An editor that uses several IPs keeps using planespotters [3] [4] as a source, which is not considered reliable. Even if it was, the IP is not including the reference in the article but just in their edit summary. If you are the one that is making such changes please stop with this.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 10:18, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Egyptair vs. EgyptAir (article uses them inconsistently)

Egyptair's web site uses all caps, which, of course, is a house style choice that we will not follow. But its logo clearly eschews camel case. While the company itself is not always the best source for determining how a name is written, it should be given consideration. The article has a mixture of Egyptair and EgyptAir. It is properly, in my opinion, titled Egyptair. The rest of the article needs to be cleaned up for consistency. I don't have the time to do it now, and I would like this to be open for discussion for a while first. Thanks! Holy (talk) 02:06, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Before the latest logo the airline used "EgyptAir" as a logo hence the confusion. MilborneOne (talk) 07:46, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

It looks like there's a space in that logo (Egypt Air), which adds even more confusion! Holy (talk) 05:26, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

It may or may not be relevant, but a reminder that many senior personnel at Egyptair would have been brought up with English as a second language. Is it the case that arabic script places a different emphasis on capitalization, or doesn't recognize it at all? So when the graphic designers asked what do you think of the new logo, maybe some of them shrugged and said 'I dunno, it's all Greek to me!'

WendlingCrusader (talk) 12:29, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Accidents & incidents

Just a reminder (because sometimes it seems to be forgotten); this is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Egyptair article.

I can see that this article is in terrible disarray, and I can also see that there is considerable history here involving editors with curious agendas, although I am also supposed to "assume good faith". I propose to consolidate most of the accidents described randomly in the main sections, into the one section where they belong - Accidents & Incidents. I can already see that in many cases it is simply a case of plain duplication, and I can see no particular reason for that. Where it may get tricky is the handful of cases where the main body contains an incident not already mentioned in the Accidents sub-section, and where that incident is poorly sourced. If I can improve the source, I will. But if not, I still believe it is better to re-position the text to a place where it belongs. However I can already predict some kick-back from other editors arguing that I am "introducing" unsourced material. I would ask them to take a step back from the letter of the law as far as Wikipedia stands, and ask the simple question "does this edit improve the article"? Or is it preferable to leave the article in its current haphazard state, equally unsourced?

On a related note; there are (at least) two fatal accidents involving leased aircraft. These jumped out at me because I noted the registrations (YR-IMK and YU-AHR), but in neither case is the full status made clear in the article. Egyptair has never operated the DC-9, so it is safe to assume that in that case neither the aircraft nor the flight crew were from Egyptair. Whilst the flight number makes it Egyptair's ultimate responsibility, failing to mention the lease arrangement means that the average reader is disadvantaged in terms of appreciating the bigger picture. I intend to put that right, but am I going to be accused of introducing 'new' information here, when my goal is to explain to the average reader what to me is screamingly obvious? I would argue that the information is not 'new', it's just not clearly stated, and it should be.

WendlingCrusader (talk) 10:42, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

@Jetstreamer

I see you have reverted a couple of my edits. Perhaps you would read the above (written a short while ago) and note that I have now found time to return with the intention of making a sequence of edits, hoping for some feedback. I am barely starting this long process and your contribution is to revert and make short comments. I would appreciate something better than that. You could have gone the extra yard and improved on my edit(s); for instance the source that you deem necessary is already there in front of you in the accident section. If my edits are not exactly to your satisfaction, then let us work together to improve this article.

Regarding your comment No consolidation at all, you removed one citation - please take a second look at what was achieved here. I attempted to consolidate three short sentences into one, at the same time cutting back the excessive number of citations for what were fairly trivial related events. A better question would have been to ask 'Is it really critical to know that the first Comet was delivered on 9 June', and have it backed up by a citation? I would say not, because the next item concerns operations starting five weeks later, backed up with the same citation. This is WP:OVERKILL.

A good rule of thumb is to cite at least one inline citation for each section of text that may be challenged or is likely to be challenged

and

It is not necessary to include a citation for each individual consecutive sentence, as this is overkill.

Worse still, for good reason I removed an unnecessary aircraft registration (per WP:REGISTRATION, as clearly stated), but your revert pushed that error straight back into play. Can you explain how your reverts are improving the article?

I understand that this article has attracted possibly more than the average number of less than welcome editors; please accept that I am here to improve things, and that helping me with advice and criticism if I should make mistakes is always most welcome.

Knee-jerk reverts are not part of that solution.

WendlingCrusader (talk) 17:08, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Please take a look at the following difference [5], specifically the References section. Your edits wiped out a citation to a reference, i.e. <ref name="Flight1960-850" /> that in the following edit was removed from the article. What I did was restore that citation. It was a first of anything for the airline, and hence worth noting (at least to me), that including the tail number of the very first aircraft. I have no problem if you want to move all the sources to the end of the sentence. On the other hand, the {{cn}} tag in this [6] other edit was unnecessary as {{sfnp|Guttery|1998|p=56}} supports the entire paragraph yet I took no action on this.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 12:56, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

By a stroke of luck I happened to be online, so firstly thankyou for your reply.

Yes, I see that the citation to a specific page was wiped out, leaving similar citations to nearby pages in place. I do not understand why you would worry about a citation for text that no longer exists? Please explain why the citation is important in itself. But may I also re-iterate my comment about citation overkill? If there was just one citation to "Flight 1960, page 850 etc", it would surely cover multiple facts. Or are these multiple closely related links related to archive protocols? For those of us without FlightGlobal subscriptions, a working archive link is essential. Must we have one for each page? (The archive links from 2014 etc are corrupted, otherwise I would be in a much better position, and perhaps we wouldn't be having this conversation!)

As a contrast, you state that {{sfnp|Guttery|1998|p=56}} supports the entire paragraph, which is something I couldn't possibly know, and doesn't fit with everything else that is going on. I am still left with the question; why is the only source for this crash Guttery (1998)? I do not mean for Wikipedia citation purposes, I mean why does the internet not show any alternative results for a crash resulting in three deaths? Strange, surely? In the absence of any other information on the internet, the Guttery citation must be added to those crash details, assuming you are still confident it is 100% correct. As this article contains several cases where crash details are corrupted, I would double-check. I am finding errors everywhere!

Finally, for now anyway, regarding the first Comet you say; It was a first of anything for the airline, and hence worth noting (at least to me), that including the tail number of the very first aircraft. Are you sure we are talking about the same thing here? Do you mean it was the first for Egyptair? I am sorry, but because of the mangled history of this airline (allegedly founded in 1932), this does not compute. The first jet aircraft maybe, but do other airlines get the same treatment? Pan-Am with the first 747 maybe, but that was bigger than Pan-Am, literally! And WP:REGISTRATION still applies. And I speak as an ex-aircraft spotter, for whom registrations were once everything. I simply cannot agree with you that the delivery, and the registration, and the introduction to service, are all worthy of mention. Pick just one! (Clue; the introduction to service is the significant event)

If I have got anything wrong, please continue this dialogue - I am here to learn, not just to score points.

WendlingCrusader (talk) 14:12, 3 December 2024 (UTC)