Wikipedia:Peer review/Swissair Flight 111/archive1

Swissair Flight 111

I worked hard to improve this article, and it is now a good one. The next logical step is to get an outside review (since I am too close to this to be impartial) before I go for FAC. - Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 16:42, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

Because the article is about a flight, not a location, I would remove {{coor title dm|44|24.55|N|63|58.4|W|scale:400000}} to avoid confusion and potential display errors. If you're going to keep it, I believe it should be placed at the bottom of the article. (See usage discussion.)
Summarize the findings of the TSB investigation in the lead -- not just how much it cost.
Merge "The aircraft" with another section because it's so small. I would also place that information before, not after, the crash.
As is, "Examination" is too small to warrant its own subsection.
"TSB Findings" still has some awkward wording, though I did reword some of it. At what speed did the plane hit the water?
Maybe include some quotes/information from the cockpit voice recording?

Good article, though I think it's unlikely to pass FAC due to its size. It'll also need more references and inline citations. Good luck. -- bcasterline • talk 17:23, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The recovery of remains proved difficult as the force of impact (approximately 350 G) caused fragmentation and the environmental conditions only allowed recovery along with wreckage recovery. (TSB Report, p. 103-105) The latter part of this sentence can be rewritten better (e.g. not use recover...recovery). Otherwise, the article reads well. Good luck.--Riurik ^(discuss) 03:09, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]