Talk:Gimli Glider

I'd like to rename Gimli Glider to Air Canada Flight 143

I'm sorry for what I did earlier but I want to rename the page Gimli Glider to Air Canada Flight 143. Reason being that flight 143 is a straightforward name rather than giving the page a special name For e.g. Air Transat Flight 236 isn't given a separate name i.e. Azores Glider. You can however mention Gimli Glider in Bold and/or insert a redirect. Also, Gimli glider is not exactly a flight number or an incident but rather just a nickname given to a plane whereas Flight 143 is a proper flight number. It is also not true that there are many flights with the number 143. I could only find Philippine Airlines Flight 143. There are also many pages, mostly in the 'See Also' which still state the older name i.e. Air Canada Flight 143 such as the one in Air Transat Flight 236, a very similiar accident. If you are not comfortable with my opinion, you can let me know why in my talk page. If you are satisfied with my response, then please make the desired changes. Thanks! Username006 (talk) 13:35, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

See WP:COMMONNAME. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:54, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

The matter was discussed almost exactly ten years ago: "Requested move". The result of the discussion was to keep its current name. --Deeday-UK (talk) 19:21, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Leave it with the common name. And, Username006, please don't copy the same thread to multiple talk pages. There is no reason to also copy your entire post to my talk page or to any other page. It's not appropriate to start threads on article talk pages (or user talk pages) and ask for responses to be left on your talk page. The discussion should be kept in one place, here. It's up to you to watch the talk page where you started the thread. Meters (talk) 20:48, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

It does seem that it would make sense, but WP:COMMONNAME is strange sometimes. In any case, the right way is to start a requested move discussion. But as noted, it has been done before. There are redirects from all possible combinations of names that one might use. Gah4 (talk) 23:51, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

What we should really be discussing is the appropriateness of plain flight number Article titles for articles on aircraft incidents. It is that that makes very little sense. If there is a specific common name for an incident it should be used. In this case there clearly is one. The Air Transat one not so much.Andrewgprout (talk)

No, the Air Transat one is also very popular because if you look up the registration of it on YouTube, you can see it on many videos' titles. And just as I said, you can refer the nickname as a notable nickname in bold or and/or add a redirect but why put the whole title with the name like so? I do know that it is common but you should emphasise more of the flight number and keep it consistent with other pages and you can mention Gimli glider as a notable nickname. Like how it is with the Air Transat one. If you are saying that the flight number makes little sense then what is the point of having it? Have you ever seen a YouTube video's title simply mentioning Gimli Glider and nothing else? No, because simply saying Gimli Glider won't make sense unless you say Air Canada Flight 143 or C-GAUN. It's like saying that if you nicknamed your computer as 'The Magic Starter' because it switches on automatically at random intervals but when someone asks you that what is your main PC then you say it's the magic starter. He / she does not know what you mean unless you say it is an HP Compaq DX5150. The same thing is happening here. If you aren't comfortable then please add a "/ Air Canada Flight 143" after Gimli Glider if you really think that the name should still contain Gimli Glider.Username006 (talk) 04:53, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

we don't generally take youtube as a source of reliable sources Andrewgprout (talk) 05:06, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

Username006, you have raised the issue and no-one has agreed with you. This has been discussed before, with similar results. It's probably time for you to WP:DROPTHESTICK. User:Andrewgprout summed it up very well: If there is a specific common name for an incident it should be used. In this case there clearly is one. This is not a case of someone's personal nickname that no-one else knows. This is the common name for this incident. Air Canada Flight 143 is not even close. Meters (talk) 05:55, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

As far as I can see, the move was proposed ten years ago and rejected by basically all respondents, and then nothing until your moves here. That doesn't seem like "readers want the name to be changed" at all. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:54, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

Oppose The proper place to discuss articles is on the article talk page, not in obscure user talk pages that no-one will see. No, this is not a good idea. The propoosed title is not what this particular incident is known by. I oppose any plan to give this article such an un-useful name. Air Canada operated many other Flight 143s before COVID and I expect they will continue to use that flight number when traffic resumes. --Wtshymanski (talk) 18:45, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

Uh, not a glider

I mean the postage stamp doesn't show a glider. It's just a jetliner carelessly portrayed. There's nothing to suggest that Canada Post even had the Gimli Glider in mind. —Isaac Rabinovitch (talk) 20:49, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Agreed. The post office press release at the time of the stamp's issue makes no mention of the Gimli Glider. See https://www.stampsandcanada.com/stamps-prices-canada-stamp.php?postage=air-canada-1937-1987&denomination=36-cents&stamp=1079&cat=1 Meters (talk) 22:20, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Gimli Glider Pilot

https://skiesmag.com/news/gimli-glider-exhibit-commemorates-40th-anniversary-miracle-landing/

2607:FEA8:4C0:2420:E09C:86D7:5655:3E49 (talk) 08:01, 25 January 2024 (UTC)