<article_title>Boeing_767</article_title>
<edit_user>Sp33dyphil</edit_user>
<edit_time>Friday, January 21, 2011 12:46:57 AM CET</edit_time>
<edit_comment>/* Incidents and accidents */ ref fmt</edit_comment>
<edit_text>As of January 2011, the 767 has been in 41 incidents,&lt;ref&gt;<strong><strike>[http://aviation-safety.net/database/dblist.php?Type=106 </strike></strong><strong>{{Cite web|url=http://aviation-safety.net/database/dblist.php?Type=106|title=</strong>Boeing 767 incidents]. Aviation-Safety.net, January 13, 2011. Retrieved: January 18, 2011.&lt;/ref&gt; including 11 hull-loss accidents,&lt;ref&gt;http://aviation-safety.net/database/dblist.php?field=typecode&amp;amp;var=106%&amp;amp;cat=%1&amp;amp;sorteer=datekey&amp;amp;page=1resulting. Aviation-Safety.net, January 13, 2011. Retrieved: January 18, 2011.&lt;/ref&gt; resulting in 569 total fatalities. The 767 has been in six hijackings involving 282 fatalities.&lt;ref&gt;http://aviation-safety.net/database/type/type-stat.php?type=106. Aviation-Safety.net, January 13, 2011. Retrieved: January 18, 2011.&lt;/ref&gt; Two notable 767 incidents were survived by all on board. On July 23, 1983, Air Canada Flight 143, a 767-200, ran out of fuel in-flight and had to glide with both engines out almost to an emergency landing. The pilots used the aircraft's ram air turbine to power the hydraulic systems for aerodynamic control. There were no fatalities and only minor injuries. This aircraft was nicknamed &quot;Gimli Glider&quot; for the airport at which it landed. The aircraft, registered C-GAUN, continued service within Air Canada until its retirement in January 2008.&lt;ref name=Air_Canada_Boe_767_Fleet&gt;http://www.yyznews.com/767.html. yyznews.com, accessed 2008-02-16.&lt;/ref&gt; On December 22, 2001, Richard C. Reid tried to shoe-bomb American Airlines Flight 63, a 767-300ER flight from Paris to Miami. Passengers and crew prevented him from lighting the fuse and subdued him. He was arrested, and later convicted and imprisoned.&lt;ref name=NYTimes_Shoe_Bomber_sentenced&gt;&lt;/ref&gt; As a result airline passengers departing from U.S. airports are required to remove their shoes for scanning at security checkpoints.&lt;ref&gt;&lt;/ref&gt;</edit_text>
<turn_user>SynergyStar<turn_user>
<turn_time>Friday, January 21, 2011 3:21:12 AM CET</turn_time>
<turn_topicname>Help with ongoing peer review</turn_topicname>
<turn_topictext>User:Sp33dyphil started a peer review for this article. Check on the page and help make improvements suggested. Thanks for any help. -fnlayson (talk) 17:33, 17 January 2011 (UTC) This article should be ready for a GA review after this. It is too big of a hurtle to go straight for FA. -fnlayson (talk) 22:24, 17 January 2011 (UTC) Overall, seems to be pretty improved, and I think worthy of GA consideration. The prose is generally consistent, the article is factually verifiable, has broad coverage, neutral, stable, and illustrated. The review was helpful in illuminating issues to improve. One difference though, captions have been trimmed for spacing. For further work, a key issue but nitpicky/cumbersome is consistency of referencing (which I have gone through many times on other articles, fortunately some bots now help out). Retrieved by dates, italics on "Flight Global" vs. "Flight International" etc. US style vs. EU dates. For higher status that needs to be worked out. Besides that issue, perhaps there are areas where claims could be challenged for refs, the prose improved or flow bettered, but that varies by reviewer. SynergyStar (talk) 03:21, 21 January 2011 (UTC) I list Flightglobal.com or Flight International depending on which is listed on the article page. I believe FI is listed if the article appears in the print magazine. -fnlayson (talk) 05:03, 21 January 2011 (UTC)</turn_topictext>
<turn_text>Overall, seems to be pretty improved, and I think worthy of GA consideration. The prose is generally consistent, the article is factually verifiable, has broad coverage, neutral, stable, and illustrated. The review was helpful in illuminating issues to improve. One difference though, captions have been trimmed for spacing. For further work, a key issue but nitpicky/cumbersome is consistency of referencing (which I have gone through many times on other articles, fortunately some bots now help out). Retrieved by dates, italics on "Flight Global" vs. "Flight International" etc. US style vs. EU dates. For higher status that needs to be worked out. Besides that issue, perhaps there are areas where claims could be challenged for refs, the prose improved or flow bettered, but that varies by reviewer. </turn_text>