Talk:Iranian passenger flight catches fire

This article misses details. It makes it sound like a simple tailstrike followed by a safe landing and sudden fire. In reality control was lost and the aircraft suffered structural damage. The wing is apparantly broken off. In addition, landing gear and engines separated (note: press reports 'ripped off' but they actually break away by design). Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 16:32, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

I looked at some pictures; engines are still attached, so that was obviously a mistake somewhere. The Tu-154 looks to have engines raised enough the nacelle wouldn't make contact with the ground. The wing is indeed sheared off at the left. All landing gear have either collapsed or separated. Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 16:44, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Review of revision 943269 [Failed]

Revision 943269 of this article has been reviewed by Juliancolton (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 04:21, 25 January 2010 (UTC). Copyright: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Newsworthiness: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Verifiability: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. NPOV: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Style: Not ready: Needs more details and context. Any word on why it caught fire? Or the conditions surrounding the event? The sources have quite a bit of relevant info that's not included here. Comments by reviewer: None added. Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews.

Revision 943269 of this article has been reviewed by Juliancolton (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 04:21, 25 January 2010 (UTC). Copyright: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Newsworthiness: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Verifiability: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. NPOV: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Style: Not ready: Needs more details and context. Any word on why it caught fire? Or the conditions surrounding the event? The sources have quite a bit of relevant info that's not included here. Comments by reviewer: None added. Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews.

The sources! They burn!

That's a metric buttload of sources for such a short article. Extremely discouraging when it comes to reviewing. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 16:19, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Review of revision 943879 [Passed]

Revision 943879 of this article has been reviewed by Blood Red Sandman (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 18:43, 25 January 2010 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: I bow humbly if I messed this up; large number of sources. To give a fuller explanation why I removed the Tupolev comment: The main problem isn't that they're Tupolev's, it's that they're old and poorly maintained. If you flew Learjets in the same condition the same pattern would emerge. I'm working on an update to this. Nice to see the AV Herald used as a source. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

Revision 943879 of this article has been reviewed by Blood Red Sandman (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 18:43, 25 January 2010 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: I bow humbly if I messed this up; large number of sources. To give a fuller explanation why I removed the Tupolev comment: The main problem isn't that they're Tupolev's, it's that they're old and poorly maintained. If you flew Learjets in the same condition the same pattern would emerge. I'm working on an update to this. Nice to see the AV Herald used as a source. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.