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.
Per
MOS:GEOLINK, I recommend having the link read "Huron, Ohio" instead of just "Huron"
The Buffalo example in GEOLINK has always been ambiguous to me as to whether the link must extend to the second-level division, or whether one may only link the locality, as in the Sydney example. My approach has been to only link locality, for accessibility reasons: To someone who has trouble distinguishing between small areas of blue and black, it's not obvious that the comma in "
Huron, Ohio" is blue and thus that "
Ohio" is part of the same link. (I have this exact vision problem, although I compensate for it by underlining all links in
my common.css, which makes it clear when a link spans multiple words.) Anyways, I'm happy to ask at
WT:MOSLINK for clarification on the Sydney and Buffalo examples if you'd like, but that's my thinking. --
Tamzin[
cetacean needed (
they|xe)
20:19, 17 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I'd recommend having the lede sentence be shorter and just indicate the scope of the disaster. Something like On August 27, 1967, sixteen skydivers drowned in Lake Erie... Currently, you have to read the whole first paragraph to know that the disaster was drowning.
Is there any source newer than 1992 that indicates whether there have been deadlier accidents? I know the industry intentionally hides that sort of information, so the current source and wording is fine if nothing newer is available.
I have been unable to find any sources more recent than the '92 article. I think that if any event had since surpassed this one for post-jump fatalities, it would have come up in my research at some point, if only in passing, but I can't prove that, hence the hedging with "as of 1992". --
Tamzin[
cetacean needed (
they|xe)
20:19, 17 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Lead-up
I recommend left-aligning the image so that it doesn't get pushed down by the infobox. (I know that image alignment can be controversial, but I find that keeping images with the accompanying text is most important.)
I'm not sure. I previously had this redlinked, but at
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ortner Airport,
User:TheLongTone made a case against notability. While that AfD wasn't precedential because it ended in a speedy deletion, I looked myself and found I couldn't argue with their assessment. (If sources do exist, it's somewhere very specialist.) I suppose I could link to that list, probably through a redirect, but I'm not sure if the list gives any useful information to the reader that isn't already in this article. --
Tamzin[
cetacean needed (
they|xe)
20:26, 17 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I've actually just cut it entirely. I say later that they did jump at that height, so it would only be worth mentioning the planned jump height if it were different from what actually happened. --
Tamzin[
cetacean needed (
they|xe)
03:48, 18 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Incident
The first sentence here most duplicates the last sentence in the previous section.
The PTOPIC for Freeman is almost certainly
this 2011 case, and PTOPIC on Dreyer is ambiguous between the '72 case and some recent 9th Circuit cases, but I've created the date-disambiguated Dreyer. Good catch. Think I had meant to do that at some point. :) --
Tamzin[
cetacean needed (
they|xe)
20:36, 17 April 2024 (UTC)reply
The discussion above 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.