Talk:RAF Weston-super-Mare
Latest comment: 9 years ago by MilborneOne in topic Accidents
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the RAF Weston-super-Mare article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | A fact from RAF Weston-super-Mare appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 2 February 2011 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Accidents
editI posted an accident yesterday and today it is gone. Where is it? Peter Auliff — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.185.3.55 (talk) 12:31, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
- Looking at the history it appears your edits added the accident on 7 July 1948. It was removed on 27 Feb as being non notable. I see this has been re added and is still in the article however citations are needed. Please see Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. The addition of "Peter Auliff 1921259 Flight Mechanic Engines U/T. Eye Witness" from the bibliography section was removed as unverifiable.If this accident is mentioned in books, newspapers or other verifiable sources these need to be added see Wikipedia:Citing sources.— Rod talk 13:39, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
- I removed it as it is not particularly notable, military aircraft accidents were fairly common and almost daily occurence in the late 1940s and 1950s so this would have to have something of note to be included like killing somebody notable. I dont see anything in this accident that passes the mark. So as a challenged addition it really needs to gain a consensus here to be added, thanks. MilborneOne (talk) 13:57, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
- I have found and added three newspaper reports about the accident and inquest. Although military aircraft accidents may have been fairly common occurrences at that time, for a small airfield an event like this could be seen as a significant event. I would welcome the thoughts of others.— Rod talk 14:23, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
- Note: Not mentioned in the article that it was serial nunber "TW284" and was a DH Sea Mosquito TR.33 of the Air Torpedo Development Unit from Gosport. MilborneOne (talk) 14:43, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks - would it be worth adding that? do you have the source?— Rod talk 14:58, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
- Yes I have a reliable source I can add, although I am still not sure it is notable, perhaps as a compromise it can be reduced to one paragraph like the bus accident. MilborneOne (talk) 16:48, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
- OK I have trimmed it now to the facts and to maintain balance, two paragraphs in an overview of the history of the airfield is not really needed and most is not support by the sources. Respect the good faith edits by User:Peterauliff but he is not a reliable source in wikipedia terms. MilborneOne (talk) 10:21, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks - would it be worth adding that? do you have the source?— Rod talk 14:58, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
- Note: Not mentioned in the article that it was serial nunber "TW284" and was a DH Sea Mosquito TR.33 of the Air Torpedo Development Unit from Gosport. MilborneOne (talk) 14:43, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
- I have found and added three newspaper reports about the accident and inquest. Although military aircraft accidents may have been fairly common occurrences at that time, for a small airfield an event like this could be seen as a significant event. I would welcome the thoughts of others.— Rod talk 14:23, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
- I removed it as it is not particularly notable, military aircraft accidents were fairly common and almost daily occurence in the late 1940s and 1950s so this would have to have something of note to be included like killing somebody notable. I dont see anything in this accident that passes the mark. So as a challenged addition it really needs to gain a consensus here to be added, thanks. MilborneOne (talk) 13:57, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
- I have removed commentry from User:Peterauliff again,I am sorry but you are not a reliable source and even if sourced as explained far to much detail for on an overview article for an airfield. MilborneOne (talk) 15:57, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
- Peterauliff, as the book by Dudley and Johnson is already listed in the bibliography, you don't need to add the book's full details again. If the book does contain pertinent info that is worth adding, from say page 1 of the book, the way to do it is by adding <ref>Dudley and Johnson (2010), p. 1.</ref> after the statement (in your own words) that you wish to add. Also, if what one book says contradicts another, it's best to mention that accounts differ rather than just replace one with another. Hope that helps, Aegoceras (talk) 12:54, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
I am disappointed that you choose to accept an unreliable source over my eye witness account which is supported by a book written by an independent author. Peterauliff (talk) 13:18, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
- I suggest that you add your alternative version, keeping it brief, and making sure it's properly referenced as per my previous comment, after the existing, referenced account, leaving the existing account as it is. If the prose needs to be smoothed over afterwards, other editors can do that. -- Aegoceras (talk) 13:37, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
- Please remember that any additions should still remain in one paragraph, the notability of the accident relates to the fact Weston appears not to have that many accidents and further detail is probably just not relevant per WP:WEIGHT. As Aegoceras has said if the slow roll was reliably reported but later contradicted by another source then we should mention both or use a more neutral language. I am sorry that Paterauliff is dissapointed we cant accept his eye witness account but as has been said wikipedia needs a reliable published source to attribute all the facts. MilborneOne (talk) 19:08, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
- I have added The Times as a reference as it also quotes an eye-witness about the slow roll. MilborneOne (talk) 19:19, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
- Please remember that any additions should still remain in one paragraph, the notability of the accident relates to the fact Weston appears not to have that many accidents and further detail is probably just not relevant per WP:WEIGHT. As Aegoceras has said if the slow roll was reliably reported but later contradicted by another source then we should mention both or use a more neutral language. I am sorry that Paterauliff is dissapointed we cant accept his eye witness account but as has been said wikipedia needs a reliable published source to attribute all the facts. MilborneOne (talk) 19:08, 4 March 2015 (UTC)