Talk:1969 Da Nang mid-air collision
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 | 1969 Da Nang mid-air collision is currently a Transport good article nominee. Nominated by Aviationwikiflight (talk) at 01:11, 19 July 2026 (UTC) This article is ready to be reviewed in accordance with the good article criteria. Any editor who has not nominated or contributed significantly to this article may review the article and decide if it should be listed as a good article. To start the review process, click start review and then save the page. See the instructions. |
 | 1969 Da Nang mid-air collision was nominated as a Engineering and technology good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (July 21, 2026, reviewed version). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Did this actually happen
Aside from the two database entries (which appear on the surface to be circular reporting), and the single line in the referenced newspaper, I can't seem to find anything about this incident. Is there anything substantive about it even actually happening?
Regardless, with the current sourcing there is not enough to establish notability as-is. nf utvol (talk) 00:47, 28 May 2026 (UTC)
GA review
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
- This review is transcluded from Talk:1969 Da Nang mid-air collision/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: Aviationwikiflight (talk · contribs)
Reviewer: San1924 (talk · contribs)
Preliminary Source Audit
I have serious concerns regarding Criterion 2 (Verifiability) based on the discussion on the Talk page. The article appears to rely on circular reporting—databases citing one another, originating from a single newspaper snippet.
To satisfy GA criteria, you need to provide at least one independent, reliable source (e.g., a military accident report or a secondary historical analysis) that confirms the details of this incident. Relying on a single contemporary news report is insufficient for an article of this scope. If independent sourcing cannot be established, I cannot pass this nomination.
General Assessment
The article is logically structured, but its factual foundation is currently in question. I am putting the review on hold until the verifiability concerns are addressed. I won't proceed with a full review of the prose and coverage until I am certain the subject meets the reliability threshold.
Criteria Checklist
- Well-written? Not yet reviewed.
- Verifiable? Significant issues identified. (See Preliminary Source Audit).
- Broad in coverage? Not yet reviewed.
- Neutral? Not yet reviewed.
- Stable? Yes.
- Illustrated? Yes.
Final Thoughts
I’ve placed this on hold. Please locate and add independent, reliable sources to confirm the incident details. Once that is done, I will happily complete the rest of the GA review.
Status: On Hold (Awaiting verifiability evidence)
- @San1924, are you using an AI to make this review, or at least looked beyond the talk page? I’m saying this because for one, the text looks LLM-esque, and if you actually looked at the article, you would see that beyond the talk page message that has since been addressed, two book sources from 2006 and 2017 are cited along with contemporary news articles and a database entry (7 independent and reliable sources) that directly discuss the event. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 14:23, 19 July 2026 (UTC)