Talk:Airbus A320 family

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Airbus A320 family article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2: 3 months

Airbus A320 family was one of the Engineering and technology good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
March 28, 2017	Good article nominee	Listed
September 11, 2024	Good article reassessment	Delisted

Current status: Delisted good article

Europe Mid‑importance

	Europe portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Europe, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to European topics of a cross-border nature on Wikipedia.EuropeWikipedia:WikiProject EuropeTemplate:WikiProject EuropeEurope articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Aviation: Aircraft

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

This article is supported by the aircraft project.

Text and/or other creative content from Airbus A320 family was copied or moved into Airbus A318 with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

GA Reassessment

Airbus A320 family

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: Delisted. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:12, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is uncited text, including entire paragraphs. The "Maintenance" section is quite short and could be expanded. Z1720 (talk) 03:07, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I am the editor who did the initial GA Review back in 2017. I am swamped with real life at the moment and simply cannot work on any issues of this truly massive article but have a few thoughts on this GAR:

I skimmed the article and counted 3 paragraphs that contained no citations, so there is some uncited content.
And yes the Maintenance section is quite short and is also unreferenced.
The main issue I see with this present version is that many instances of referenced content haven't been updated since 2017, so the content is woefully out of date.

Shearonink (talk) 04:03, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are also uncited statements at the end of paragraphs. I use User:Phlsph7/HighlightUnreferencedPassages to show what is uncited in an article. Z1720 (talk) 05:50, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, ok, that's a tool I am not familiar with- thanks. I guess I'm thinking the uncited sentences/paragraphs could possibly just be excised without any major loss to the main content. The fact that so much of the information is frozen in time and is out of date by at least 7 years...*that* to me is a bigger problem. I'm surprised folks from WP:WikiProject Aviation or WP:WikiProject Aircraft haven't weighed-in or volunteered. I mean, really, this article is not in an area of my expertise or interests...I'm just the editor who reviewed it. Maybe things are slow because it's Labor Day weekend in the States? - Shearonink (talk) 17:12, 31 August 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.

Vandalism

Obviously this ain't the only vandalized page, but it seems especially targeted. I'll do my best to remove potential vandalism. Also why? vandalizing gets nothing done, but get you banned. smh Cheers! <3 Taffy boeing b 17 (talk) 17:20, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Omg stop vandalising. (sorry I'm not able to help fast enough). Kids, if you read this, just stop. It ain't funny and it's just more work for other people, and it's misleading. Just stop, and have a nice day. Cheers! <3 Taffy boeing b 17 (talk) 19:16, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Users doing the vandalizing will probably not see this or care if they do. See WP:RVAN for how to respond. -Fnlayson (talk) 19:24, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]