Talk:Jeju Air Flight 2216

Korea Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Korea, a collaborative effort to build and improve articles related to Korea. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how use this banner, please refer to the documentation.KoreaWikipedia:WikiProject KoreaTemplate:WikiProject KoreaKorea-related
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Aviation: Accidents

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

This article is supported by the Aviation accident project.

Disaster management

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Should we use (known)

Since the total amount of casualties and survivors are not finalized, should we put (known) next to the survivors and casualties on the summary table? CrushedAsian255 (talk) 01:32, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe "reported" is better. The story is still unfolding. guninvalid (talk) 01:33, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alternatively, I think I agree with @Mason7512's edit. Probably better to keep the numbers off the infobox entirely for now. guninvalid (talk) 01:39, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

is it possible to put citations in the infobox? CrushedAsian255 (talk) 01:40, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

yes, you just have to place it in plain wiki text (i.e. <ref>{{Cite news|....}}</ref> ) Mason7512 (talk) 01:44, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I put one in for the plane type already, but you can do full citation format in infobox. guninvalid (talk) 01:46, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should hold off on putting any numbers in the infobox until official statements on definitive or known numbers are made (not just "__ feared dead" or "__possible casualities" or "approximately ___". There is no harm in waiting for the situation to develop. Mason7512 (talk) 01:47, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is the best idea until more information comes out. CrushedAsian255 (talk) 01:49, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I added a comment in the Infobox wikitext but people are still adding numbers, don't want to break the 3RR CrushedAsian255 (talk) 01:53, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's about time we take this to WP:RFPP. guninvalid (talk) 02:01, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 02:03, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Listed at WP:RPPI#Jeju Air Flight 2216. guninvalid (talk) 02:06, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Name Jeju or South korean

Jeju Airline — South Korean airline, WP:COMMON QalasQalas (talk) 02:13, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

27th December diversion

The following statement is published in the articles opening. There is no indication how relevant this is to the article. The source also states the reason for the diversion is unknown. I don't believe this should be included. It alludes to be related to the accident, but at this stage this isn't proven.

The aircraft involved, HL8088, had been involved in an emergency landing on the 27th of December, two days prior to Flight 2216. It had been diverted from Beijing-Daxing to Seoul-Incheon. JetBlast (talk) 02:20, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I put it there temporarily with the intent that it be integrated into a section for background. It now has been, thank you for bringing this up. Darer101 (talk) 02:27, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure it should be in the article at all. At the moment there is nothing to link this diversion to the accident. JetBlast (talk) 02:29, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's true but it is of notability for the aircraft history. Darer101 (talk) 02:30, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am sure the aircraft has diverted many more times for the years. We wouldn't list all those would we? Listing this event here is purely scaremongering. JetBlast (talk) 02:33, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Image

If someone has a high-quality image of HL8088 with good copyright, please contribute! Darer101 (talk) 02:22, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Appropriate to use Engine Surge?

There is a video Source showing a supposed Engine Surge while the plane was mid flight. Yosh56 (talk) 02:39, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Yosh56 Please see WP:TWITTER, we can't use Twitter as a source. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 02:41, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find the source, I saw it from a twitter video. However it was from the news article covering the crash

Here is the news channel covering the accident

https://imnews.imbc.com/m_main.html Yosh56 (talk) 02:44, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Yosh56 I might sound rude here so I do apologise in advance for my bluntness, upon a quick inspection I can't find the image you're talking about, and I can't read Korean(?) so I can't personally verify that it says anything about an engine surge on the page. Do you have any other sources stating that an engine surge was seen? CommissarDoggo^Talk? 02:46, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're good, I am actually studying for my PPL. From the twitter video I linked you can see the engine is spewing fire, that usually indicates that it was an engine surge. This surge may be because of the bird strike. I was thinking it would be valuable to put on the Wikipedia Article. Yosh56 (talk) 02:49, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Or it may be a compressor stall Yosh56 (talk) 02:50, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Yosh56 Unfortunately, calling it an engine surge or a compressor stall would be classed as original research at this juncture. Wikipedia is in the business of summarising what sources say about a subject. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 02:51, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will try to translate the news article, and find where it mentions engine surge/compressor stall. Yosh56 (talk) 02:53, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, real quick lemme ping you a welcome message on your talk page, I see you got one back in 2019 but it's always useful to get new info. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 02:53, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Insert Image of Plane Crash

Insert the image of the plane crash. SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 02:41, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@SimpleSubCubicGraph If you've got one that's copyright free, feel free. Otherwise it simply cannot be included I'm afraid. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 02:43, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@CommissarDoggo: What about a WP:NFI? E_F⁵ 03:15, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@EF5 There are certainly plenty of potential candidates around at the moment, definitely worth a look. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 03:16, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BRD

@ItzChickenYall, please explain why including both the year of manufacture and specifying how old the aircraft is isn't redundant? CommissarDoggo^Talk? 02:44, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ItzChickenYall Tagging again, in case you missed the first one. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 03:09, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of restored source

Hi @CommissarDoggo, just letting you know I've restored the tweet by FlightRadar24 per WP:RS/SPS since I believe they're a subject matter expert. Staraction (talk | contribs) 03:06, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Staraction Yup, thanks for the courtesy ping. Didn't take much of a look at the source itself, just saw Twitter and saw red haha. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 03:08, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ItzChickenYall - same thing here; I'll WP:BOLDly restore this time; will not if it gets reverted again per WP:3RR. Staraction (talk | contribs) 03:08, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I've been reverted again by @ItzChickenYall - could you please let me know why you're reverting the source addition? Thanks. Staraction (talk | contribs) 03:16, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

because its a WP:TWITTER source ItzChickenYall (talk) 03:17, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]