Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Crossair Flight 498/1

Crossair Flight 498

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.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Over two weeks with no efforts made to address the issues with this article. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:30, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A notice was given 11 months ago on issues regarding the article, which as of yet, have not been addressed. The comment stated:

I came to this article chasing down a {{failed verification}} tag, but have concluded that there are serious referencing issues throughout the article that call for a downgrading of the assessment of this article because it does not meet Wikipedia's current standards for referencing and verifiability. The ones that jumped out at me (and the only ones I actually checked) are two citations, tagged as "abegg-jan10" and "abegg-jan11". The January 10 reference does have a dead url attached to it which can be retrieved with the Wayback Machine. But that is a brief snippet that states that a plane has crashed and little else, not supporting most of the statements that have that reference attached. The January 11 reference only cites the Associated Press, Ernst Abegg, with no url. Searching through January 2000 newspaper articles I searched on newspapers.com, I can see, for example, the Guardian, page 12, January 11 2000, that cites Ernst Abegg and the Associated Press, but does not contain many of the facts that are attributed to this reference. Nor do I find other articles around that date that contain those facts, but I didn't perform an exhaustive search. Rather than butcher the article by removing the invalid references and the statements they support, they should probably be worked over or replaced with citation needed tags. If anyone has this article on their watchlist and feels like taking a stab at it before a delist is proposed, have at it. I'll check back later to see if progress has been made before proceeding further.

Pinging @RecycledPixels as the author of the notice. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 09:01, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delist, because of (at least) the reasons spelled out in my talk page entry nearly a year ago. Since that time, the page has been edited by some infobox and image warriors, and a bot that changed some http links to https links, but that's about it. Primary contributor who brought this to GA has made fewer than 20 edits in the last decade. The {{failed verification}} tag that had initially brought me to the article and prompted my comment had been in place since September 2020 without being addressed. RecycledPixels (talk) 14:07, 8 March 2026 (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.