Template:Did you know nominations/1966 NASA T-38 crash
- The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by PumpkinSky talk 00:01, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
1966 NASA T-38 crash
[edit]- ... that astronauts Elliot See and Charles Bassett died when their plane crashed into the building where their spacecraft was being assembled?
Created/expanded by Dr.frog (talk). Self nom at 00:57, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
Article is not fully supported by inline sources. --LauraHale (talk) 12:19, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
I have plagiarism concerns with this article. Source text: "See cut in his afterburners and attempted a sharp right turn; but it was too late. The aircraft struck the roof of the building ." Article text: "See turned on the afterburners to increase power while pulling up and turning sharply to the right. It was too late; the plane struck the roof of McDonnell Building 101." This was after looking at only two sources. The rest need to be investigated. --LauraHale (talk) 12:48, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
- I can't access the offline sources easily and passing this without some one attempting to review these sources for further issues makes me really nervous given that this was moved to the prep area with the problem. While unintentional, it suggests more stuff needs to be looked at. appears okay. looks okay. Some one else who is better at copyright needs to tick off on this. --LauraHale (talk) 00:00, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
- FWIW, the books I used as references for this article are all searchable online via Google books; that is how I discovered them. E.g. Fallen Astronauts Dr.frog (talk) 08:43, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
- While I've not reviewed the article for DYK purposes, I have significantly improved the quality and precision of the referencing to make such a review easier for a dedicated editor. I've also fixed an assortment of minor formatting issues, mostly dealing with spacing and punctuation, and added a NASA image of the two astronauts. - Dravecky (talk) 01:22, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Excuse me, but I am unhappy with being accused of plagiarism and then the accuser declining to produce any evidence. I think this is contrary to Wikipedia:Assume good faith, specifically the avoid accusing others of harmful motives without clear evidence bit. I don't care if my article makes it into DYK or not, but I don't want this libel against me to stand uncontested in the public record. The truth of the matter is that I wrote this article myself.Dr.frog (talk) 18:07, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
As someone writing academically, I understand your concerns. The discussion regarding potential plagiarism can be found here. I've asked for a second opinion regard this, which is why the hold up. Wikipedia's definition of plagiarism exceed those normally understood by academia. --LauraHale (talk) 20:53, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Source review Checked every reference. (Would not normally do this.) Some minor problems:
- FN4: should be pp. 33-34
- FN5c: Says southeast, not southwest. No mention of runway 24.
- FN7: not really a reliable source, but quotes one. Change to use FN1, pp. 323-324
- FN12: Needs page numbers. 12a is p. 99; 12b is p. 96
- All other footnotes verified correct. No close paraphrase. Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:24, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
All concerns have been addressed now and very obvious no remaining plagiarism concerns. This is good to go. --LauraHale (talk) 09:20, 25 June 2012 (UTC)