This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Airblue Flight 202 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 |
![]() | This article is written in Pakistani English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, travelled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
![]() | A news item involving Airblue Flight 202 was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 28 July 2010. | ![]() |
![]() | A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on July 28, 2011, July 28, 2017, and July 28, 2019. |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The aircraft cannot be an A320, as Airblue does not operate the type. Of course, once the registration is known, then the type will be apparent. Mjroots ( talk) 06:48, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
I've re-added the METAR to the article. This is relevant to the accident and weather conditions prevailing at the time. Mjroots ( talk) 07:32, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
In the past, I've been criticised for putting the translation directly into the article. On the American Airlines Flight 331 article, the metar is on a subpage - American Airlines Flight 331/METAR. See Talk:American Airlines Flight 331#METAR for reasons. Mjroots ( talk) 08:19, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Side question that has been bugging me. Is the METAR raw data supposed to have the (stray) equal sign at the end of it? — Arsonal ( talk + contribs)— 19:11, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
I was in Islamabad at the time of the crash - about 2 miles from the crash site. The METAR description does not accord to how most people would describe the weather at the crash site (rather than the airport). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.222.99.244 ( talk) 15:52, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
There is a photo of the aircraft at Plane Spotters. I've e-mailed the photographer to request permission for its use in the article. — Arsonal ( talk + contribs)— 07:37, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
The number of survivors was changed from 45 to 4. I've just checked the ref and it clearly states 45 survivors. If there is a new source for a lower number, then it needs to be added when a change is made. Verifiability beats truth every time. Mjroots ( talk) 10:03, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
You probably didn't update your cache. At the time that I changed the number of survivors, the source article at India Times had been changed to 4-5 survivors. Later on, BBC also confirmed that there were conflicting reports on survivors. I've been an editor long enough to know what beats what.-- Ferengi ( talk) 10:51, 28 July 2010 (UTC) Is there any source at all for the speculation that there may actually be survivors despite the statement of none? this seems very out of place here.
I noticed a discrepancy in the flight times quoted in the article. ....
"The flight left Karachi at 07:50 local time (03:50 UTC).[11] Flight controllers at Benazir Bhutto International Airport lost contact with the aircraft at 09:43 local time (04:43 UTC)[4]"
I have checked and found that Karachi and Islamabad are BOTH in the same time zone, namely UTC +5.
Either someone has got their times wrong or their simple arithmatic wrong :-) . 0750 (Local) is not 0350 (UTC +5).
94.192.224.56 ( talk) 10:33, 28 July 2010 (UTC) Greg (not signed in)
OK - I made the assumption that the city pages would have correct information (Gibbs' (NCIS) 1st rule - never assume! - lol) - However, then both times in the OA were wrong! The UTC times should read 0150 & 0350 respectfully. Which I see has just been altered as I write - fair play :)
94.192.224.56 ( talk) 11:08, 28 July 2010 (UTC) Greg (not signed in)
I don't think this section should be included in the article. Slasher-fun ( talk) 11:41, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Khizer Pervaiz did not board this flight, please remove his name from the victims list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.221.40.3 ( talk) 11:53, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
hey guys i created this list sourced from a news site , i did not know that this was against guidelines ... as i registered on same day i added this list... new to all this ( talk) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Salmantq ( talk • contribs) 16:55, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
Name | Age | Gender | Profession |
---|---|---|---|
Misha Dawood | 19 | Female | Footballer |
Zafar Saleem | Male | director-general of the Sindh Workers Welfare Board |
But in the table of casualties it is displayed as 1. AlexHe34 ( talk) 17:19, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
I found some sources saying that flight was coming from Turkey to Islamabad via Karachi. [1]. -- Saki talk 09:39, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
The plane was inbound to Islamabad on an approach requiring a heading of 296 degrees (from SE to NW). When the field was in view, they were to circle to land (left-hand traffic, counter-clockwise, semi-rectangular path), requiring them to pass to the east and then to the north of the airport until lined up with runway 12, at which point they would turn to the runway heading of 116 degrees for final approach. This approach is called "ILS approach runway 30, circle to land runway 12." The plane was supposed to stay within 5 nm (9.26 km) of the airport, but the crash was just over 8 nm to the north. They never made it around to turn final on runway 12. All of this is in http://avherald.com/h?article=42ee2e58&opt=0. This answers a lot of the earlier questions about going around, missed landings, etc. I put some of this info in the article. There's also more technical info in http://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2010/07/reference-document-on-the-pakistan-crash/60545/ for those able to read approach plates, but this info needs to be corroborated with a current approach plate. The one reprinted in the article is expired. Dcs002 ( talk) 17:47, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
The Times of India list has 158, repeat: ONE HUNDRED FIFTY-EIGHT, names on it. -- Kenatipo ( talk) 19:33, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
There is some confusion regarding foreign nationals on board the flight. After some checking I think that there was no German citizen on board. I have found no other source other than [2] claiming there was a German passenger. However I have found more than one claiming he was Austrian [3], [4], [5] and a mention in an aviation forum that he had dual citizenship (search the comment section), but that is not a reliable source, so we have to more or less ignore it. So I think we should go with one Austrian passenger, no German. -- Ferengi ( talk) 07:07, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
Just looking at this article for the first time. The undue weight flag on the "Early speculation" section is in place, but I don't see any discussion yet. I personally don't have a problem with the section per se, but I do have a problem with citing someone's credentials solely as an "aviation expert," even if that's all the BBC gives us on the guy. I particularly have a problem with the following:
That was simply a quote from a guy musing about whether the plane was "circling" (does that mean holding, missed approach procedure, or going around?), but the plane crashed during a landing attempt, didn't it? I think it adds nothing of expert value to say that if a plane was doing a maneuver that we know it wasn't doing, we would want to know whether it was high enough to execute that maneuver safely. That's not even speculative. Dcs002 ( talk) 09:47, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
In my opinion, given the changes that have been made to this section, I think it would be ok to remove the undue weight tag. The section is no longer all about what Ferguson had to say, and what is left of his quotes seems reasonable to me. Besides, there are two other speculations to balance against Ferguson. Anyone else have an opinion? Dcs002 ( talk) 21:28, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Adding links to AA965 and AI148 is a little dark, isn't it? Sure, they were both CFIT, but I can't really see any other connections. WackyWace converse | contribs 09:59, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
Why is this relevant to the article when it is about the airline itself and not the accident? / Hey Mid ( contributions) 19:54, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
An IP has been inserting a link to photos in the nationality table. Does anybody else think they are necessary? Dabomb87 ( talk) 14:11, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Calling all you pilots and dispatchers! Does anyone have access to a current approach plate for Islamabad? If so, would you confirm the information at the end of paragraph 3 in the "Accident" section, and cite the current plate? I cited an article from The Atlantic, but the approach plate they used and reprinted was expired. Thanks! Dcs002 ( talk) 17:52, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
The end of the article currently is : "The final report says that the pilot kept on going in the wrong direction despite the co-pilot repeatedly told him to take the plane up. Finally, when the pilot realized his co-pilot was right, he tried to climb, but it was too late, so the aircraft eventually crashed in the hills."
There is no source for this, and I can't find any report, final or otherwise. Aesma ( talk) 11:16, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Airblue Flight 202. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 14:32, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 3 external links on
Airblue Flight 202. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the
|checked=
to true
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 23:02, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on Airblue Flight 202. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://tribune.com.pk/story/39231/When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 09:16, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Is this section truly necessary? It regurgitates the information from the Investigation Report (ref 17). The second to last paragraph under 'Investigation' summarizes the report well, and if readers are interested, they can read the report.
If others feel it adds to the article, I'll work on rewriting it. Otherwise, I'll likely remove it.
Wyronth ( talk) 00:03, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 14 external links on Airblue Flight 202. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 07:14, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Airblue Flight 202. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:17, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Airblue Flight 202. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:52, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Airblue Flight 202 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 |
![]() | This article is written in Pakistani English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, travelled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
![]() | A news item involving Airblue Flight 202 was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 28 July 2010. | ![]() |
![]() | A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on July 28, 2011, July 28, 2017, and July 28, 2019. |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The aircraft cannot be an A320, as Airblue does not operate the type. Of course, once the registration is known, then the type will be apparent. Mjroots ( talk) 06:48, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
I've re-added the METAR to the article. This is relevant to the accident and weather conditions prevailing at the time. Mjroots ( talk) 07:32, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
In the past, I've been criticised for putting the translation directly into the article. On the American Airlines Flight 331 article, the metar is on a subpage - American Airlines Flight 331/METAR. See Talk:American Airlines Flight 331#METAR for reasons. Mjroots ( talk) 08:19, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Side question that has been bugging me. Is the METAR raw data supposed to have the (stray) equal sign at the end of it? — Arsonal ( talk + contribs)— 19:11, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
I was in Islamabad at the time of the crash - about 2 miles from the crash site. The METAR description does not accord to how most people would describe the weather at the crash site (rather than the airport). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.222.99.244 ( talk) 15:52, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
There is a photo of the aircraft at Plane Spotters. I've e-mailed the photographer to request permission for its use in the article. — Arsonal ( talk + contribs)— 07:37, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
The number of survivors was changed from 45 to 4. I've just checked the ref and it clearly states 45 survivors. If there is a new source for a lower number, then it needs to be added when a change is made. Verifiability beats truth every time. Mjroots ( talk) 10:03, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
You probably didn't update your cache. At the time that I changed the number of survivors, the source article at India Times had been changed to 4-5 survivors. Later on, BBC also confirmed that there were conflicting reports on survivors. I've been an editor long enough to know what beats what.-- Ferengi ( talk) 10:51, 28 July 2010 (UTC) Is there any source at all for the speculation that there may actually be survivors despite the statement of none? this seems very out of place here.
I noticed a discrepancy in the flight times quoted in the article. ....
"The flight left Karachi at 07:50 local time (03:50 UTC).[11] Flight controllers at Benazir Bhutto International Airport lost contact with the aircraft at 09:43 local time (04:43 UTC)[4]"
I have checked and found that Karachi and Islamabad are BOTH in the same time zone, namely UTC +5.
Either someone has got their times wrong or their simple arithmatic wrong :-) . 0750 (Local) is not 0350 (UTC +5).
94.192.224.56 ( talk) 10:33, 28 July 2010 (UTC) Greg (not signed in)
OK - I made the assumption that the city pages would have correct information (Gibbs' (NCIS) 1st rule - never assume! - lol) - However, then both times in the OA were wrong! The UTC times should read 0150 & 0350 respectfully. Which I see has just been altered as I write - fair play :)
94.192.224.56 ( talk) 11:08, 28 July 2010 (UTC) Greg (not signed in)
I don't think this section should be included in the article. Slasher-fun ( talk) 11:41, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Khizer Pervaiz did not board this flight, please remove his name from the victims list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.221.40.3 ( talk) 11:53, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
hey guys i created this list sourced from a news site , i did not know that this was against guidelines ... as i registered on same day i added this list... new to all this ( talk) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Salmantq ( talk • contribs) 16:55, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
Name | Age | Gender | Profession |
---|---|---|---|
Misha Dawood | 19 | Female | Footballer |
Zafar Saleem | Male | director-general of the Sindh Workers Welfare Board |
But in the table of casualties it is displayed as 1. AlexHe34 ( talk) 17:19, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
I found some sources saying that flight was coming from Turkey to Islamabad via Karachi. [1]. -- Saki talk 09:39, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
The plane was inbound to Islamabad on an approach requiring a heading of 296 degrees (from SE to NW). When the field was in view, they were to circle to land (left-hand traffic, counter-clockwise, semi-rectangular path), requiring them to pass to the east and then to the north of the airport until lined up with runway 12, at which point they would turn to the runway heading of 116 degrees for final approach. This approach is called "ILS approach runway 30, circle to land runway 12." The plane was supposed to stay within 5 nm (9.26 km) of the airport, but the crash was just over 8 nm to the north. They never made it around to turn final on runway 12. All of this is in http://avherald.com/h?article=42ee2e58&opt=0. This answers a lot of the earlier questions about going around, missed landings, etc. I put some of this info in the article. There's also more technical info in http://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2010/07/reference-document-on-the-pakistan-crash/60545/ for those able to read approach plates, but this info needs to be corroborated with a current approach plate. The one reprinted in the article is expired. Dcs002 ( talk) 17:47, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
The Times of India list has 158, repeat: ONE HUNDRED FIFTY-EIGHT, names on it. -- Kenatipo ( talk) 19:33, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
There is some confusion regarding foreign nationals on board the flight. After some checking I think that there was no German citizen on board. I have found no other source other than [2] claiming there was a German passenger. However I have found more than one claiming he was Austrian [3], [4], [5] and a mention in an aviation forum that he had dual citizenship (search the comment section), but that is not a reliable source, so we have to more or less ignore it. So I think we should go with one Austrian passenger, no German. -- Ferengi ( talk) 07:07, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
Just looking at this article for the first time. The undue weight flag on the "Early speculation" section is in place, but I don't see any discussion yet. I personally don't have a problem with the section per se, but I do have a problem with citing someone's credentials solely as an "aviation expert," even if that's all the BBC gives us on the guy. I particularly have a problem with the following:
That was simply a quote from a guy musing about whether the plane was "circling" (does that mean holding, missed approach procedure, or going around?), but the plane crashed during a landing attempt, didn't it? I think it adds nothing of expert value to say that if a plane was doing a maneuver that we know it wasn't doing, we would want to know whether it was high enough to execute that maneuver safely. That's not even speculative. Dcs002 ( talk) 09:47, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
In my opinion, given the changes that have been made to this section, I think it would be ok to remove the undue weight tag. The section is no longer all about what Ferguson had to say, and what is left of his quotes seems reasonable to me. Besides, there are two other speculations to balance against Ferguson. Anyone else have an opinion? Dcs002 ( talk) 21:28, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Adding links to AA965 and AI148 is a little dark, isn't it? Sure, they were both CFIT, but I can't really see any other connections. WackyWace converse | contribs 09:59, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
Why is this relevant to the article when it is about the airline itself and not the accident? / Hey Mid ( contributions) 19:54, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
An IP has been inserting a link to photos in the nationality table. Does anybody else think they are necessary? Dabomb87 ( talk) 14:11, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Calling all you pilots and dispatchers! Does anyone have access to a current approach plate for Islamabad? If so, would you confirm the information at the end of paragraph 3 in the "Accident" section, and cite the current plate? I cited an article from The Atlantic, but the approach plate they used and reprinted was expired. Thanks! Dcs002 ( talk) 17:52, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
The end of the article currently is : "The final report says that the pilot kept on going in the wrong direction despite the co-pilot repeatedly told him to take the plane up. Finally, when the pilot realized his co-pilot was right, he tried to climb, but it was too late, so the aircraft eventually crashed in the hills."
There is no source for this, and I can't find any report, final or otherwise. Aesma ( talk) 11:16, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Airblue Flight 202. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 14:32, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 3 external links on
Airblue Flight 202. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the
|checked=
to true
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 23:02, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on Airblue Flight 202. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://tribune.com.pk/story/39231/When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 09:16, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Is this section truly necessary? It regurgitates the information from the Investigation Report (ref 17). The second to last paragraph under 'Investigation' summarizes the report well, and if readers are interested, they can read the report.
If others feel it adds to the article, I'll work on rewriting it. Otherwise, I'll likely remove it.
Wyronth ( talk) 00:03, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 14 external links on Airblue Flight 202. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 07:14, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Airblue Flight 202. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:17, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Airblue Flight 202. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:52, 26 November 2017 (UTC)