Talk:Freckleton Air Disaster

There seems to be no reason to doubt the veracity of the contributions of User:Quiltedsquirrel, although User:MilborneOne has already tried to rv one edit. But unfortunately no references are given. The previous versions were mostly based on published material. I'm not sure that it's appropriate to include contact email addresses for individuals in a main article. It's also contrary to wiki policy for an article to show two different competing versions side-by-side. That's the job of the edit history and Talk page.

But I am reluctant to do whole-scale reversion yet, just to stay within Wiki guidelines. The article obviously needs a major tidy up: the chronological sequence in "Course of Events" seems to have been largely compromised. There also needs to be some rationalisation for relevance e.g. " ... the Village constable was in his home repairing a chair."

Could User:Quiltedsquirrel please provide any published sources for the new material? Any other suggestions? Martinevans123 (talk) 09:06, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry Martinevans123 I reverted Quiltedsquirrels additions before I read your note, concerned that it is not sourced and possibly a copyright violation. I have no doubt the Quilted added the information in good faith and I have left a message on his/her talk page offering help and assistance in adding the information. But we do need a reliable/verifiable source for the information. MilborneOne (talk) 11:48, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Yes, the `new' material seemed to have the ring of authenticty, even eyewitness veracity perhaps, but there were no sources. There seemed to be an internal inconsistency, however, wrt whether or not airframe structural failure had been a contibuitng factor or not. Martinevans123 (talk)

Requested move 6 September 2025

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Jeffrey34555 (talk) 16:18, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

---

Freckleton Air Disaster → 1944 Freckleton USAF B-24 Liberator Crash – The proposed title is more accurate/commonly used/consistent with WP: AVINAME and since someone brought it up in the discussion for 2025 Dhaka fighter jet crash. VF15 | SeriouslyBored | VWT (talk) 19:49, 6 September 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose – Over twenty of the referenced sources refer to the event as the Freckleton air disaster or disaster, enough to become the WP:COMMONAME in my view. Plus the proposed title is too long ('USAF' is unnecessary) and the capitalisation is wrong (the current capitalisation is wrong too, btw). --Deeday-UK (talk) 09:16, 7 September 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose move from WP:COMMONAME per Deeday-UK; correct capitalisation by moving to Freckleton air disasterFreckleton air disaster. Rosbif73 (talk) 06:50, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

But you didn’t feel the need to discuss the recent incorrect page move? Let’s put it back where it was. Seasider53 (talk) 11:07, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

No, I didnt. If you're going WP:COMMONAME, you might see that almost all sources refer to the disaster in uppercase, if they even do. I see

"Freckleton disaster" or "Freckleton Air Crash" as well. VF15 | SeriouslyBored | VWT (talk) 13:45, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

You would check Wikipedia naming conventions. See Category:Accidents and incidents involving military aircraft, for example. Seasider53 (talk) 13:54, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

maybe wikipedia should change them per commoname. VF15 | SeriouslyBored | VWT (talk) 14:08, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

R-rrright. Seasider53 (talk) 14:13, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

Skeptical, yes, and not very likely.. Perhaps to prevent future confusion we should request someone write a naming rule in Wikipedia:AVINAME. VF15 | SeriouslyBored | VWT (talk) 14:14, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

User:Seasider53, I did not intend to deliberately violate existing wikipedia naming conventions. I was simply going off the most up-to-date sources for naming, which is WP:AVINAME. If it is decided, then we can either add an addendum to that project or revert this article's name. VF15 | SeriouslyBored | VWT (talk) 00:28, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose, most sources use the Freckleton Air Disaster name, and WP:COMMONNAME is policy while WP:AVINAME is a guideline. Also, minor nitpick: the USAF was created as a separate service in 1947. In 1944, it was the United States Army Air Forces or USAAF. Carguychris (talk) 13:08, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

  My bad about the incorrect name. "Ser" SeriouslyBored | VWT (talk) 13:26, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

No worries. This is a very common mistake, as the USAF is a direct successor to the USAAF, and includes USAAF activities, personnel, and aircraft in its histories. Carguychris (talk) 13:50, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

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.