This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Yeti Airlines Flight 691 article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
A news item involving Yeti Airlines Flight 691 was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 15 January 2023. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened: |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
Not sure why suddenly there's been 2 edits on the flight number, one to 671 and one to 677. Gonna cite the following from The Kathmandu Post article on the crash:
"An ATR 72 aircraft of Yeti Airlines with a call sign 9N-ANC that took off for Pokhara from Kathmandu at 10:30am crashed at Nayagaun."
Okay. I don't think there's anyone disagreeing that the plane involved was ANC. The problem is with the flight number.
Based on the source provided by the user who edited the flight number to 677, the flight, which was supposed to be flown by ANC, showed up as Unknown. Clicking on the flight history of ANC, on 15 Jan at 08:05am, ANC departed as flight 671. Not 10:30, so I think we can definitely rule out that. ANC next flew from PKR to KTM as 672 and it landed at 09:18. Direction doesn't match so definitely not 672. The next flight it would fly, according to the flight history page, was flight 691. It was scheduled to depart at 10:32 and arrive at 10:59, but right now it's showing up as cancelled. The next flight on the list, which is 677 (the one the user edited to), was scheduled to depart at 11:25 and arrive at 11:50. Yes, this is the flight that I mentioned earlier showed up as Unknown.
Given that we know the plane departed at around 10:30am, I'm pretty sure the closest flight we have here that matches the timing is the 10:32 Flight 691. SBS6577P ( talk) 11:36, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
Can we please add a reference confirming the death toll as I have seen a couple times it has gone from 68 to 72 to 69 to 72 Dubstar44 ( talk) 14:56, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
The lat/long in the infobox are for the old airport. The reporting is the crash was near runway 12 of new airport. 159.196.168.202 ( talk) 03:18, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
I’m not sure I believe the facebook livestream linked under “external videos”. It seems fake. Is there any confirmation on its legitimacy? Tankpiggy18 ( talk) 04:39, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
Right now I see The Daily Mail, Times of India, Business Today and quite a number of other sources acknowledging the stream, so I suppose it is recognized as true for now. If it turns out to be fake we can remove it later. SBS6577P ( talk) 05:44, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
This is the quote from the editor of the Aviation Herald - you are misrepresenting it above.
Fake Videos around By Simon Hradecky on Monday, Jan 16th 2023 17:13Z
There are currently two fake videos making the rounds:
1) The "onboard" passenger video claimed to have been streamed live. This was another flight until the point the video suddenly gets blurred and shows some sort of crash scene. It does NOT show the aircraft pitching up (that would certainly be seen) and rolling in (the first few moments would definitely be seen too). Clearly falsified video.
2) The video from the other side showing an engine fire. This aircraft rolls to the right rather than the left. There is no evidence of fire on the authentic video published in the coverage. This video from the right is thus not credible whatsoever with respect to this Yeti Crash.
Due to frequent mention of these videos and claims, they are authentic, the comments are now closed.
Maungapohatu ( talk) 21:22, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
There are currently a number of fake videos making the rounds, however, there is also a version of an onboard passenger video of the crash around, that according to the passenger's family had been livestreamed via Facebook (under normal circumstances mobile phones can be operated on board of aircraft only in flight mode, with no transmissions from the phone possible). This video appears credible but remains independently unverifyable. [ sic
...2) There are many doctored versions of that onboard video around rendering these versions not credible and fake.
At first I was not aware of any other version of that passenger video thinking there was only one (my) version around that was clearly fake, therefore profoundly apologize for inadvertently including that credible video in my fake rating.
Well, this seems to be the entire onboard video, and at the end you clearly can hear talking human voices while the plane is alreadycrashed and burning, how on Earth may this ever be authentic? Regards -- A.Savin ( talk) 23:55, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
Wikipedia reports the information that reliable sources report. This video is trusted by a lot of reliable sources including BBC. They have confirmed it with a victim's family, so the chance that this video is fake is pretty small. While the AV Herald comment was by an editor the entire site appears to be somewhat of a personal blog, so it probably isn't an RS and we shouldn't give
WP:UNDUE weight to it for now, IMO.
Aaron Liu (
talk) 20:58, 17 January 2023 (UTC) Apparently the person behind the blog is an aviation security expert and later admitted that they saw a doctored version of the video and confused it for the real version, see above
Aaron Liu (
talk) 15:16, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
I don't see anything that would disprove the many reliable sources claiming the footage to be wrong, mostly because the person shown filming was confirmed to have actually been on the plane in question. The cited passage from Aviation Herald is actually a conclusion of the general views of the posts in their comments section. Moreover, their first point is actually wrong. If you actually look at the facebook footage and pay particular attention to the last segment showing the view through the plane's left-side windows, you'll see that the left wing actually does slightly start banking left before something goes seriously wrong. T v x1 19:47, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
@ WWGB The entire purpose of dating temporal claims with WP:ASOF is that it will not be without qualification in the future. That is precisely why you do qualify it. Presumably you will not come back to this article when the next ATF crashes and update it. Either revert your changes or delete the sentence entirely. 46.183.103.8 ( talk) 20:55, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
According to the Washington Post and ABC News, there were two Americans in the plane crash. Should we wait for conformation news from the U.S. government? The thing I don’t understand is that there were 72 people on the plane crash and the nationality of the passengers is already equal to 72 people. So is there is miscalculation of passengers/nationality of passengers? EmperorXYZ ( talk) 03:53, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
I am confused too because I found some sources like this one saying four Americans aboard. Btw, User:WWGB, I can't find any sources confirming the Dual US Citizenship argument. Filipinohere ( talk) 11:49, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
So how we can add the info on the Americans aboard in the list @ WWGB? Filipinohere ( talk) 13:10, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 10:22, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
The paragraph about ILS is just tenuous speculation and is misleading. Why would ILS have been needed at that time? It should be removed. But that source does say "Yeti Airlines said the plane's cockpit voice recorder will be analyzed locally, but the flight data recorder will be sent to France. Both were retrieved Monday". So the previous paragraph needs to be corrected. 205.239.40.3 ( talk) 12:09, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
There has been a slow-burning edit war with national flags of those killed being added and removed. Can we have a discussion and straw poll here to resolve the issue? Thanks, WWGB ( talk) 07:21, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
Engines feathered, flaps down, banking turn to make a last-minute runway change, and no mention of any hardware defect, I would assume their must be some RS that speculates pilot error as the cause of the crash and yet 10 months later and that standard, typical and expected speculation is glaringly obviously missing. I read the entire Article and had to figure it out myself, when it should have been early and prominent in the Lede.
2600:1700:10DE:30C0:AED2:1FBF:B12D:BBF1 ( talk) 06:59, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
why Nepal Plane All year crash 118.91.172.66 ( talk) 14:41, 7 February 2024 (UTC)