Talk:Amelia Earhart/Archive 16

Archive 10

←

Archive 14

Archive 15

Archive 16

More detail on the Deep Sea Vision Discovery reported on 2024 January 29?

Could we add a bit more detail to the new paragraph on the Deep Sea Vision discovery? NPR says "the shape of the object in the sonar images closely resembles Earhart's aircraft, a Lockheed Electra, both in size and tail", which is a bit more compelling than the article's current text, "what appeared to [be] an airplane shaped [sic] object". (The word "be" is missing, and the text "airplane shaped" should be "airplane-shaped", but those are separate issues.) NPR also says that the discovery is "about 100 miles off Howland Island", which is a little more specific than "within 100 miles from Howland Island". (In case the article updates, the version I am citing is archived here.) Per WP:ER, I am seeking consensus on this question before proposing specific wording changes. 166.181.88.109 (talk) 20:14, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

I will fiddle with it. Refreshing to see someone other than TIGHAR who always seems to be pushing their latest theory. Binksternet (talk) 20:57, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

I don’t think it needs more. I’ve read dissenting comment that it is not an aircraft wreck. Too easy to get caught up in the latest theory and buzz. Newzild (talk) 01:27, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Dissenting comment from where? The news sources I looked are all cautiously positive. And I didn't add "more" conjecture, just more context. Binksternet (talk) 05:10, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Here for example, but plenty more if you look: https://www.livescience.com/archaeology/have-we-found-sonar-evidence-of-amelia-earharts-lost-plane-not-so-fast-experts-say — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newzild (talk • contribs) 06:29, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Also here: https://time.com/6589865/amelia-earhart-missing-plane-possible-discovery/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newzild (talk • contribs) 06:46, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

On one of those the opposing viewpoint is from a TIGHAR representative, which isn't worth upholding. The other one is cautiously optimistic. Binksternet (talk) 13:53, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

We have to be careful not to directly copy sources. Apparently that can lead to WP:CCIs. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:06, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

My expectation is that her Electra has been discovered and we'll find out for sure sometime this year. It is for this reason i've been editing the article heavily and getting it into better shape for an influx of readers. To the question at hand - I've considered how the possible discovery section could be expanded but I don't think there's much to add without speculating - and this article has plenty of speculation already, we can just wait and see. Desertarun (talk) 15:06, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Physics and Society

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 February 2024 and 10 May 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jack1231344 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Sschriber.

— Assignment last updated by Tmzyang (talk) 00:10, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

Poor Video

The video captioned "Newsreel of Earhart flying the Atlantic Ocean in 1932" is actually about her trip from Hawaii to California. Also, the video itself seems to partially looped. 35.137.220.224 (talk) 04:47, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Someone already fixed the caption. It seems the confusion arose because the video file itself was misnamed in Commons. I've fixed the issue, so hopefully that prevents further confusion. - ZLEA _T\^C 15:01, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 June 2024

Under Aviation Career and Marriage and Financial Crisis Amelai needs to be changed to Amelia. 2603:80A0:800:BD8:3ADA:8316:75A5:3D5A (talk) 04:34, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

 Done NotAGenious (talk) 04:49, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

Typo edit request

Right after the summary data, the sentence starts with the mistyped name "Earnart" 173.72.38.241 (talk) 16:52, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

 Done, thanks. - ZLEA _T\^C 17:33, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

GOCE c/e notes

(originally left at Desertarun's talk page):

Hi all, I've now finished my copy-edit. I've marked passages in various sections with [citation needed] where I thought a citation was required. I've also marked one subsection, "World flight in 1937" --> "Flight between Lae and Howland Island" with {{Refimprove}} because some important text, mostly about RDF and radio communications, there is uncited. I also substantially rearranged the sections "Legacy" and "In Popular Culture", and retitled a couple of earlier subsections.

I think some other paragraphs could be moved into a "Personal life" section, particularly that about Earhart's marriage and move to California, to avoid mixing her flying career with her personal life. I also considered merging the transatlantic flight and the round-the-world flight into the section "Aviation career and marriage" but there's so much material there I didn't want to swamp it. And I wasn't sure about listifying the new subsection "Legacy" --> "Tributes and memorials" because some of the text there is extensive. Maybe you or another editor could find a better way of divide up and present the text for our readers.

Oh, and I swapped the footnotes system from {{refn}} to {{efn}} because the latter works with all formats of citations; I found problems when trying to move a lengthy quotation cited with a bare ref out of "References" into "Notes". The only difference if that the footnotes are now listed by letter not number. Moving to a single citation style would be ideal and make life easier for future editors but that's a lot of work so it's not a request, just a suggestion for later on. Anyway, it's been an honor to work on this article. Cheers and good luck with it, Baffle☿gab 06:54, 17 June 2024 (UTC).

I will re-organise the article to separate personal life from aviation career - as is common practise in most other biography articles. Desertarun (talk) 13:54, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

It won't be possible for me to do this after all. It seems she didn't really have any personal life away from aviation, her husband was her publicist and fully involved in her aviation. And I can't see any content which is distinctly non-aviation or formerly private and now public. Desertarun (talk) 21:56, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

"Safford" reference doubled

In the Works Cited, the "Safford, Laurance F." reference is doubled up, with slight differences 118.209.216.216 (talk) 06:59, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Only testing

I tried to make an Edit Request and it just vanished. So will this simple entry work? 14.201.77.123 (talk) 13:27, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Just had more trouble 14.201.77.123 (talk) 13:37, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

WHY ON EARTH when I make junk comments they come through, but when I try to do something useful (4 tries) they just vanish????? 14.201.77.123 (talk) 13:40, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

I wonder if it dislikes URLs. So I have gelded the URL (most of the commas should be slashes) and here goes:

..........

Please update the reference which is currently number 158: "Brandenberg, Bob. Probability of Betty Hearing Amelia on a Harmonic"The main link is broken and the archived link only links to a PDF which is only an included table in the (old) main report. There is an updated version of the main report which now is "Harmony and Power: Could Betty Have Heard Amelia Earhart on a Harmonic?" at https,,,tighar.org,Projects,Earhart,Archives,Research,ResearchPapers,Brandenburg,HarmonyandPower.htm

Please substitute this in the reference. Thanks. 14.201.77.123 (talk) 13:49, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Another test: https,,,tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/ResearchPapers/Brandenburg/HarmonyandPower.htm 14.201.77.123 (talk) 23:59, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Please fix bad reference/link

Please fix the reference as described in the end part of the previous section "Only testing". Thanks. 14.201.77.123 (talk) 13:55, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Are you sure the link you provided is in fact an updated version of the current source? From what I can see, the "revised" date of your link predated the current source by at least several months (if the year in the reference is to be believed]. - ZLEA _T\^C 15:10, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

@ZLEA The current link, to "BettyProb182531a.pdf" is to the same PDF table which is linked in the old report, which is still accessible at

https,,,tighar.org,Projects,Earhart,Archives,Research,Bulletins,30_BettyHarmonic,30_Bettyharmonic.html  (URL to be repaired as before.)

It is linked to the words "Probability Tables" in the box just above the Introduction of that old report, which is dated 2001, and therefore the PDF should be also. The PDF link should be replaced by the report it is in, and the old report should be replaced by the new report, at https,,,tighar.org,Projects,Earhart,Archives,Research,ResearchPapers,Brandenburg,HarmonyandPower.htm

Thanks, 14.201.77.123 (talk) 03:12, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Actually, I have been mislead by the layout of the old report. The PDF is still current, as a link in the NEW report. It is item 18 in the Notes at the end of the new report. It is still the case that the PDF link should be replaced by the link to the (new) report it is in. 14.201.77.123 (talk) 03:44, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Geardona (talk to me?) 00:48, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

@Geardona

Ok, I will try again (and I have a much better replacement this time).

Please change X to Y, where X is the existing reference 157 "Brandenberg, Bob. 'Probability of Betty Hearing Amelia on a Harmonic Gardner Sunset: 0538Z Sunrise: 1747Z.'...", and Y is web page 

https#tighar.org/Projects/Earhart/Archives/Research/ResearchPapers/Brandenburg/signalcatalog2.html (with the obvious correction), which I suppose should be cited something like "Brandenberg, Bob. and Gillespie, Ric. 'Catalog and Analysis of Radio Signals During The Search for Amelia Earhart in July 1937' etc...".

X is only a single PDF table within a much longer web page, makes little sense standing alone, and does virtually nothing to support the article sentence it is attached to. Y is the first page of a long list of communications to and (supposedly) from Earhart's Electra after the "loss". (Former 14.201.77.123) 110.175.117.151 (talk) 01:04, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Also, there is the sentence "The Gardner Island hypothesis supposes Earhart and Noonan were unable to find Howland Island and continued south." There is nothing "supposed" about the fact that they were unable to find Howland Island. Please change the sentence to read "The Gardner Island hypothesis supposes that after Earhart and Noonan were unable to find Howland Island, they continued south." 110.175.117.151 (talk) 03:14, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Or even better, "The Gardner Island hypothesis supposes that Earhart and Noonan continued south after they were unable to find Howland Island." 110.175.117.151 (talk) 03:32, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

I disagree. What is certain is that they never reached Howland Island. Whether they were "unable to find" Howland Island or if they went down before they would have been able to locate it has never been confirmed, so the current wording is accurate. - ZLEA _T\^C 06:57, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

@ZLEA What does "reach" actually mean? In this context, to me it means "be able to go the distance". At 07:42 Earhart transmitted: "We must be on you, but cannot see you...". Either this transmission or one a bit a bit later was described as "maximum loudness", implying they genuinely were "close" to Howland. After a flight of around 4100 km, I think this can reasonably be described as "they reached (or almost reached) Howland Island, but couldn't find it." Her last transmission was received at 08:43, so there was plenty of flying time if at around 7am someone had been able to tell them "Fly bearing xxx to Howland". In all probability they would have landed safely. The problem was finding it, not reaching it. But since I can't quote a Reliable Source that puts the above together, I suppose it is Original Research and can't go in the article. Too bad. It still seems strange to me to have a sentence that implies that "they didn't find Howland Island" is only a supposition. What scenarios are there where she finds Howland but doesn't reach it? 110.175.117.151 (talk) 10:12, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

I withdraw the last question. You have already mentioned such a scenario. The circumstances which I feel make it implausible are not admissible. 110.175.117.151 (talk) 13:32, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

And I meant to say "around 8am", not 7am. Brain slip. 110.175.117.151 (talk) 22:51, 26 August 2024 (UTC)