This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Two Categories were added today by Sepa. Cleared as filed presumably intended to rv these two Cats but ended up blanking half of para 12 and the whole of paras 13 to 19. I've now restored the page to the last version by Guinnog. Phase1 16:17, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
Even CNN calls it by the British name - http://www.cnn.com/LAW/trials.and.cases/case.files/0010/lockerbie/ - it happened in the UK so the article should get the British name. PMA 07:43, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
This was the deadliest attack on American civilians until 9/11? What about the Oklahoma City Federal Building bombing? That killed something like 400 Americans.
Who is Jaswant Basuta and why is he part of this article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.231.58.16 ( talk • contribs)
Jaswant Basuta was a passenger who, after checking in and heading to the gate, stopped at the airport bar and ended up missing the flight by a few minutes. He was later held under suspiscion of being involved in the bombing, but released after he checked out. -- SmthManly / ManlyTalk / ManlyContribs 06:51, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
The Pan Am Flight 103 category already embraces the Terrorist incidents in the 1980s category. The category Aircraft hijackings is not appropriate for the Pan Am Flight 103 article. I have therefore reverted the categories added today by Juux. Phase4 16:37, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external links was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
maru (talk) contribs 05:27, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
I've added in memorials in Lockerbie, well the ones that I know of, and included sources so Phase4 leaves them alone. I don't know if anyone knows of any others but the ones that were listed were all foreign, I think it would be appropriate to ensure that UK based ones are updated too -- Goggage 14:57, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
For the longest time I have felt this is an excellent article; the only real obstacle to making it a featured article is the citing of sources. If we worked hard to put in some inline citations, we might be able to bump it up to that status. PBP 03:31, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
As stated above, inline citations would really help this article, since there's a lot of facts.
The prose is generally quite good and I think it maintains NPOV well... but the "rumours" mentioned are troubling me, since they are generally not in-line cited well enough to put a critical eye to how seriously to take them.
I would recommend you submit this to the Wikipedia:Peer review process, since I think there'd be a lot gained by doing so.
Content suggestions:
PrimroseGuy 17:55, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
My professor, Ambassador David Fischer, who was Consul General in Munich at the time, claims to have also had reservations for Pan Am Flight 103, along with his wife/family. He said something came up and they changed the tickets. So, I believe he could be added as another high profile person who changed tickets from this flight. He stated this last week in class and would probably make a substantiating statement if need be. 69.181.40.182 06:29, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Article mmets "What is a GA?". For FA I would recommend converting the refs to the newer cite.php format. I fixed some formatting issues on the headings. [1] Iola k ana• T 15:22, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
For some time the info box image has not been visible. I uploaded a new image for the info box today swapping it for the invisible image which, in its relocated position, is now OK. Phase4 15:06, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
According to the Sunday Herald, "Michael Scharf, who was the counsel to the US counter-terrorism bureau when the two Libyans were indicted for the bombing, [has] described the case as “so full of holes it was like Swiss cheese” and said it should never have gone to trial." He has also called it a "whitewash". [2] -- noosph e re 15:30, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Members of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles are in the process of doing a re-review of current Good Article listings to ensure compliance with the standards of the Good Article Criteria. (Discussion of the changes and re-review can be found here). A significant change to the GA criteria is the mandatory use of some sort of in-line citation (In accordance to WP:CITE) to be used in order for an article to pass the verification and reference criteria. Currently this article does not include in-line citations. It is recommended that the article's editors take a look at the inclusion of in-line citations as well as how the article stacks up against the rest of the Good Article criteria. GA reviewers will give you at least a week's time from the date of this notice to work on the in-line citations before doing a full re-review and deciding if the article still merits being considered a Good Article or would need to be de-listed. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact us on the Good Article project talk page or you may contact me personally. On behalf of the Good Articles Project, I want to thank you for all the time and effort that you have put into working on this article and improving the overall quality of the Wikipedia project. LuciferMorgan 02:47, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
I am delisting this article because it has terrible prose (I couldn't even understand the lead), is poorly organised and lacks inline citations.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Veesicle ( talk • contribs) 23:04, 9 March 2007
14th April 2007- A FORMER Scottish police chief has given lawyers a signed statement claiming that key evidence in the Lockerbie bombing trial was fabricated. He has confirmed that parts of the case were fabricated and that evidence was planted. At first he requested anonymity, but has backed down and will be identified if and when the case returns to the appeal court. http://news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1855852005
This is quite a good artical with mention of the different controversies including some not noted in the WP artical. It definately rates inclusion. I'm not Scottish and have no idea how reliable the Scotsman is so will leave it for discussion what to add to the WP page. Wayne 05:16, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Phase4, I don't understand why you removed the coordinates geocoding I recently added. Are you saying that point "C" is not the best point to use, or that 55°5.7′N 3°20.3′W / 55.0950°N 3.3383°W are not the correct coordinates for point "C"? -- GregU 15:09, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
removed "eating salty tacos" from article. Unsure what salty tacos had to do with the fact that many of the dead where American. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.230.204.232 ( talk) 00:23, 14 May 2007 (UTC).
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Two Categories were added today by Sepa. Cleared as filed presumably intended to rv these two Cats but ended up blanking half of para 12 and the whole of paras 13 to 19. I've now restored the page to the last version by Guinnog. Phase1 16:17, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
Even CNN calls it by the British name - http://www.cnn.com/LAW/trials.and.cases/case.files/0010/lockerbie/ - it happened in the UK so the article should get the British name. PMA 07:43, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
This was the deadliest attack on American civilians until 9/11? What about the Oklahoma City Federal Building bombing? That killed something like 400 Americans.
Who is Jaswant Basuta and why is he part of this article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.231.58.16 ( talk • contribs)
Jaswant Basuta was a passenger who, after checking in and heading to the gate, stopped at the airport bar and ended up missing the flight by a few minutes. He was later held under suspiscion of being involved in the bombing, but released after he checked out. -- SmthManly / ManlyTalk / ManlyContribs 06:51, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
The Pan Am Flight 103 category already embraces the Terrorist incidents in the 1980s category. The category Aircraft hijackings is not appropriate for the Pan Am Flight 103 article. I have therefore reverted the categories added today by Juux. Phase4 16:37, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external links was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
maru (talk) contribs 05:27, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
I've added in memorials in Lockerbie, well the ones that I know of, and included sources so Phase4 leaves them alone. I don't know if anyone knows of any others but the ones that were listed were all foreign, I think it would be appropriate to ensure that UK based ones are updated too -- Goggage 14:57, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
For the longest time I have felt this is an excellent article; the only real obstacle to making it a featured article is the citing of sources. If we worked hard to put in some inline citations, we might be able to bump it up to that status. PBP 03:31, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
As stated above, inline citations would really help this article, since there's a lot of facts.
The prose is generally quite good and I think it maintains NPOV well... but the "rumours" mentioned are troubling me, since they are generally not in-line cited well enough to put a critical eye to how seriously to take them.
I would recommend you submit this to the Wikipedia:Peer review process, since I think there'd be a lot gained by doing so.
Content suggestions:
PrimroseGuy 17:55, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
My professor, Ambassador David Fischer, who was Consul General in Munich at the time, claims to have also had reservations for Pan Am Flight 103, along with his wife/family. He said something came up and they changed the tickets. So, I believe he could be added as another high profile person who changed tickets from this flight. He stated this last week in class and would probably make a substantiating statement if need be. 69.181.40.182 06:29, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Article mmets "What is a GA?". For FA I would recommend converting the refs to the newer cite.php format. I fixed some formatting issues on the headings. [1] Iola k ana• T 15:22, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
For some time the info box image has not been visible. I uploaded a new image for the info box today swapping it for the invisible image which, in its relocated position, is now OK. Phase4 15:06, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
According to the Sunday Herald, "Michael Scharf, who was the counsel to the US counter-terrorism bureau when the two Libyans were indicted for the bombing, [has] described the case as “so full of holes it was like Swiss cheese” and said it should never have gone to trial." He has also called it a "whitewash". [2] -- noosph e re 15:30, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Members of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles are in the process of doing a re-review of current Good Article listings to ensure compliance with the standards of the Good Article Criteria. (Discussion of the changes and re-review can be found here). A significant change to the GA criteria is the mandatory use of some sort of in-line citation (In accordance to WP:CITE) to be used in order for an article to pass the verification and reference criteria. Currently this article does not include in-line citations. It is recommended that the article's editors take a look at the inclusion of in-line citations as well as how the article stacks up against the rest of the Good Article criteria. GA reviewers will give you at least a week's time from the date of this notice to work on the in-line citations before doing a full re-review and deciding if the article still merits being considered a Good Article or would need to be de-listed. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact us on the Good Article project talk page or you may contact me personally. On behalf of the Good Articles Project, I want to thank you for all the time and effort that you have put into working on this article and improving the overall quality of the Wikipedia project. LuciferMorgan 02:47, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
I am delisting this article because it has terrible prose (I couldn't even understand the lead), is poorly organised and lacks inline citations.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Veesicle ( talk • contribs) 23:04, 9 March 2007
14th April 2007- A FORMER Scottish police chief has given lawyers a signed statement claiming that key evidence in the Lockerbie bombing trial was fabricated. He has confirmed that parts of the case were fabricated and that evidence was planted. At first he requested anonymity, but has backed down and will be identified if and when the case returns to the appeal court. http://news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1855852005
This is quite a good artical with mention of the different controversies including some not noted in the WP artical. It definately rates inclusion. I'm not Scottish and have no idea how reliable the Scotsman is so will leave it for discussion what to add to the WP page. Wayne 05:16, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Phase4, I don't understand why you removed the coordinates geocoding I recently added. Are you saying that point "C" is not the best point to use, or that 55°5.7′N 3°20.3′W / 55.0950°N 3.3383°W are not the correct coordinates for point "C"? -- GregU 15:09, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
removed "eating salty tacos" from article. Unsure what salty tacos had to do with the fact that many of the dead where American. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.230.204.232 ( talk) 00:23, 14 May 2007 (UTC).