Talk:US, UK investigators seek 777 engine redesign to stop repeat of London jet crash

Review

Revision 783567 of this article has been reviewed by ShakataGaNai (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 17:04, 13 March 2009 (UTC). Copyright: Not ready: n/r Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Not ready: n/r NPOV: Not ready: I'm sorry, but the title "Boeing 777s to continue to fly with potentially lethal flaw" and first line I believe just aren't NPOV. Almost sounds like a sensationalist headline to me. I've got the NTSB recommendation in front of me. To date no one has been killed because of this. The one crash had injuries and nothing more. There was only one other "incident" and that didn't even delay the flight. Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: --ShakataGaNai ^_^ 17:04, 13 March 2009 (UTC) Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews.

Revision 783567 of this article has been reviewed by ShakataGaNai (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 17:04, 13 March 2009 (UTC). Copyright: Not ready: n/r Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Not ready: n/r NPOV: Not ready: I'm sorry, but the title "Boeing 777s to continue to fly with potentially lethal flaw" and first line I believe just aren't NPOV. Almost sounds like a sensationalist headline to me. I've got the NTSB recommendation in front of me. To date no one has been killed because of this. The one crash had injuries and nothing more. There was only one other "incident" and that didn't even delay the flight. Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: --ShakataGaNai ^_^ 17:04, 13 March 2009 (UTC) Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews.

Note to second reviewer

Please bear in mind that some text in this article is derived from or directly copied from the NTSB; as work of the US federal government such text is in the public domain and we are free to use it in any way we see fit. Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 18:39, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Review 2

Revision 784084 of this article has been reviewed by DragonFire1024 (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 16:52, 14 March 2009 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: Errors from 1st review fixed. As PDF's are NTSB, copy and paste is allowed. NTSB is a US government entity therefore their PDFs are PD. --DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 16:52, 14 March 2009 (UTC) The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

Revision 784084 of this article has been reviewed by DragonFire1024 (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 16:52, 14 March 2009 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: Errors from 1st review fixed. As PDF's are NTSB, copy and paste is allowed. NTSB is a US government entity therefore their PDFs are PD. --DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 16:52, 14 March 2009 (UTC) The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

Typo

{{editprotected}}
"apparant" => "apparent" Van der Hoorn (talk) 19:56, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Fixed it myself. Van der Hoorn (talk) 23:39, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Heh heh! Tempodivalse [talk] 23:41, 16 April 2009 (UTC)