Talk:Steve Fossett/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Deleted incorrect information

Proposition that Fossett may have only been on a pleasure flight when he crashed is cited to a news article that doesn't say that at all--in fact, it says the opposite.

Global Flyer

It was designed and built by Burt Rutan and his company, Scaled Composites, the company which also designed the first man-made spacecraft, SpaceShipOne, for long-distance solo flight.

I seriously doubt this is true. Last time I checked, all spacecraft were "man-made", unless we're counting UFO's. Dukwbutter 15:05, 8 September 2007 (UTC)DukwButter

I agree, it should probably be "civilian".88.131.91.2 13:42, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

World Records

He holds the world record for the number of world records held, with 62 world records.

Is that number 62 including the above mentioned record (of having the record in number of world records)? ;-) Shanes 12:48, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I believe he also holds the world record for the number of times someone has held the world record for the number of world records held. David Brooks

You can go very far like this.. :) GôTô 13:04, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Solo jet flight

It's nice to be enthusiastic about his accomplishment of yesterday, but I don't think it's necessary to refer to it three times in the introductory paragraph, which is supposed to be general and short. The later paragraph is more than adequate (and a little perspective may show that it's too much: the jet was basically Rutan's accomplishment, and I think the balloon is more noteworthy). David Brooks 20:03, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Rutan, and the much overlooked Jon Karkow.

Headline text

WORLD RECORDS WORLD RECORDS

Fossett holds 88 Aviation World Records!!!

Note on editors

User:PowersPhotos, who has been editing this page, has identified himself to me as "working at the direction of Steve Fossett", and "contributing to this article at the direction and correction of Steve himself". I believe that User:69.235.230.234 is the same person. — Johan the Ghost _seance 11:29, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

This article does not sound objective or scientific. Someone NOT working at the direction of Steve Fossett should edit it. Wikipedia is about informing others, not serving yourself. 24.179.81.187 22:57, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

This article should include information on his "pre-adventurer" business career that made SF a multi-millionaire, IMHO.

HELP WITH NEW PHOTO

I uploaded a new photo and it did not appear and the old one is gone. HELP!!!

-PowerPhotos

Not first solo circumglobal flight?

An anon recently edited the article with this edit summary: added "unrefueled circumnavigation" to clarify accomplishment (previously innacurate)

While I believe this may indeed be true, I cannot find any mention of any previous circumglobal solo flight, even if refueling is allowed, on the FAI site or anywhere on Wikipedia. Context for Fossett's accomplishment would be enhanced if someone were to provide a citation for this supposed earlier flight.--chris.lawson 03:58, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Type of balloon

"In 2002, he became the first person to fly around the world alone, nonstop, in a balloon"
...What kind of balloon was he piloting? "Balloon" here is linked to Balloon_(aircraft), which includes many types of balloons. The hot air balloon article doesn't mention his accomplishment, and I was unable to find him mentioned on other balloon-related articles either. I could have missed it, but it seems that the info would be quite relevant here. There is a suggestion in the Balloon (aircraft) article that the Rozière type was used, but again, there is no explicit statement of this. 168.9.120.8 14:44, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Current Event

Someone keeps editing it to say that he died yesterday. Can someone lock it in some way,please? XPhile2868 18:48, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree. Can an admin please lock this article. In the space of a few minutes there have been multiple vandalism edits by IPs. As more people turn on the news and hear about this, there's going to be more and more bad edits. I'm not saying lock the article for everyone, just for IPs. Answerthis 19:09, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Shouldn't we have a whole new section for this? Whether he turns up dead or alive this event will ultimately end up having it's own section in the article. I think we should cut it out of the "overview" section (as it was originally) now and re-create the "reported missing" section, probably placing it at the end of the article. Thoughts?--Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 19:20, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I've posted a request for page protection (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection#Current_requests_for_protection), so hopefully an admin will lock it soon. Until then we'll have to watch out for the IP edits, since those seem to be the ones vandalising. Answerthis 19:25, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Semi-protected. Give me a shout if this becomes a problem. Rklawton 19:27, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I think it was necessary. A number of IP editors were making good contributions, including reverting vandals, but the vandalism was quite fierce and would probably only get worse in the hours to come.--Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 19:29, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Sorry... The IP user is right! Fossett is dead. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.64.254.179 (talk) 12:10, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

There was an image on the page, which someone took off for copyright reasons. Someone had asked for the coordinates where this image was taken. They were 38.174397, -119.459721, which you can copy paste into Google Earth to see. I've looked at it and I see nothing. I don't know if this was the location they were talking about on the news that a hiker saw something, but last I heard on FoxNews (a search representative gave a briefing) was that that location (where the hiker saw something) was not fruitful. I don't know where those coordinates come from. 66.41.232.41 22:45, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Missing

Where should the "Missing" section go? Right now it's tacked in the midst of achievements - a location that makes no sense. Rklawton 21:42, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Does that look better? I gave accomplishments it's own explicit section header, bumped all the accomplishment headers down a level to be under it, and moved the Missing section after the accomplishments. - TexasAndroid 23:25, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I think that looks fine for now. Eventually we will probably need a section--presumably at the beginning--detailing his business ventures since he is a billionaire commodities broker. Oddly we have nothing at all about that at the moment.--Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 01:31, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

six degrees of spelling

A missed achievement needs better aim: I would agree that it should be moved.

On cnn I heard that the governments of Nevada & California are searching,... Then someone mentioned how it's near the recent mine incident. The most reported incident of the year is how Mr. B. M. had promised that he would find his employees, then he quit searching, in Utah.

So, is there an implication that Mr. Fossett had been to Utah, Colorado, Idaho, Wyoming,.... this morning?

Farrah_Leni_Fawcett_Majors was married to Lee Majors, who played Steve_Austin_(fictional_character); but, it's not "Steve Fawcett".

[[ hopiakuta Please do sign your signature on your message. ~~ Thank You. -]] 22:05, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

---

It is now late dusk in California [19:55], Nevada, Utah, Colorado, Idaho, Wyoming.

I have heard people say that he did not want a parachute; oh, shoot. The various stories are convoluted, contradictory, as to what communcations devices he has; would such a wealthy person have gps, lights, reflectors, satellite-telephone?

[[ hopiakuta Please do sign your signature on your message. ~~ Thank You. -]] 02:55, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Richard Branson

Shouldn't this article mention Richard Branson? -- AnonMoos 15:18, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

How did he afford all this?

Shouldn't this article discuss where this guy's money came from that he could do all of these silly things? I heard Richard Branson on BBC say Fossett was building a deep sea submarine, to go to the bottom of the ocean, deeper than anyone has gone. That's incredibly expensive. This guy was infinitely wealthy? A billionaire. How did that happen? SwampT 01:37, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

If Richard Branson made such a comment about a deep sea submarine, he would have to be rather ignorant of history. The Mariana Trench, the deepest point in the oceans, was already visited by the U.S. Navy's bathyscaphe Trieste in 1960, and a number of other research vessels since then. —Quicksilver^{T @} 00:12, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Not necessarily. Perhaps he meant the first person to go solo or the person to go the fastest, something like that. I haven't seen any references to it in the press, anyway.--Gloriamarie 23:49, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

It's in the intro: "Fossett became a successful commodities broker in Chicago, founding his own firm, Marathon Securities, and later moved to Beaver Creek, Colorado." after getting his MBA from Wash U. I agree that more should be written about this aspect, but it is mentioned in the article. Also, those "silly things" are interesting to a great number of people.--Gloriamarie 04:10, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

How about mentioning his parents and any wealth he obtained from them. Being self-made is a great thing but if he's self-made with help from his parents, that's not so great. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.161.178.89 (talk) 12:46, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

How does it matter how he made his money? Off-topic discussion can be deleted from the talk page. This is not the place to judge whether people "deserve" their money or any such nonsense.--Gloriamarie 01:54, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Of course it matters! The man is notable for being a billionaire adventurer. If he didn't all that money he wouldn't have been able to do nearly so much. The question of whether Fossett is a self-made man or someone who has inherited wealth, or some combination, is certainly relevant to this. No one is suggesting that the article makes a judgement call on whether he deserved his money, that's for readers to form their own opinions on. I would like the article to include information about where his exceptional wealth comes from though. 12:35, 8 September 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.75.168.148 (talk)

He is not known as a "billionaire adventurer" because he's not a billionaire; the most I've read that he is is a "multi-millionaire." Perhaps you have him confused with his friend Richard Branson. He seems to be a self-made man, in the sense that he founded his own company, got an education and was successful with it. I have seen no mentions of his parents being wealthy, or him coming from a wealthy family. That doesn't mean it's not possible. It also depends on your definition of "wealthy."--Gloriamarie 23:44, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

In the September 7 paragraph there are two links to Google, one to Google Inc which is redirected to Google, and the other to Google. Only one link is needed. 199.125.109.26 18:10, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Besides how he afforded the flying he did, I'd be very curious to see a price tag for the search. I'm not saying that a man's life isn't worth it, I believe it is, but the extent of the search, and the money being expended on it is definitely noteworthy. I just got back this morning from fixing one of the 15 or so helos that's working the search...add the cost of operating those to all the CAP fixed wing aircraft, and all the USAF and Army assets flying the search, and you have a sizeable bill...a lot more than is typically spent on a search for a downed aircraft. AKRadecki^Speaketh 00:31, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

From what I hear the search teams have found six other plane crashes, which were previously unknown, while searching for steve, so even if they don't find him they still have something to show for their time and effort. --74.134.127.195 11:19, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

But that's partly my point: When each of those 6 aircraft went missing, why wasn't there an equally extensive search? AKRadecki^Speaketh 13:11, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps no one knew they were missing? I haven't seen them identified publicly as known missing persons, so maybe they didn't have any family or friends, or anyone who knew they were in that area. Some of them could be very old, from a time when the military might not have done searches of that nature. I have never heard of someone being missing in recent memory and the authorities giving up without looking for a reasonable amount of time... sometimes millions can be spent. One example in question is the recent mining disaster, in which the federal authorities assisted, with one federal official even dying during the digging of the search and rescue. There also might have been an equally extensive search, that just didn't find those particular aircraft (and could have found others, who knows).--Gloriamarie 23:44, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

My suspicions were correct according to CNN. At least one of the wrecks was from the 1960s. Search crews looked for this man's father in the 1960s for 60 days, so the search for Fossett will most likely continue for awhile longer. His wife also said he owned a watch with a satellite transponder, but did not take it with him. I'll mention that in the article.--Gloriamarie 01:46, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

FWIW, I wrote an article a while back, 1996 New Hampshire Learjet crash about a crash that was relatively close to populated areas, though in heavy forest, and it went unfound for 3 years! AKRadecki^Speaketh 15:02, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

As far as affording the adventure lifestyle, few people fund the majority of their trips with their own money. Fossett's RTW yacht record was on the "Playstation" trimaran. His RTW solo jet flight was in the "Virgin Atlantic" Global Flyer. The RTW balloon flight was in the "Bud Light" Spirit of Freedom. The man also joined teams that seemed to have relatively imminent success. His gliding records were generally made in a two-place glider with a world record pilot up front who was a part of a separate, larger team organizing the endeavor. I'm not implying Fossett isn't a world class pilot, but he utilized resources (human, corporate, social) to succeed. His recreation flight across the atlantic in a Vimy was as a "guest pilot" of an organization that had planned the quest and accomplished similar tasks earlier.

A lot of his endeavors didn't require hundreds of thousands of dollars of funding, and those that were expensive were done on a "beer budget" as far as adventures go. The Iditarod dog sled race, Iron Man triathalon, and swimming the English Channel require little funding. The RTW balloon race (although it took six tries) featured simplified, unpressurized balloons costing ~$300,000 compared to his multi-million dollar funded competitors. His latest landspeed record attempt was to be made in Craig Breedlove's already constructed, yet failed, Spirit of America. In addition, he set several records in the same vehicle:

• several yacht records in his catamaran, which was renamed atleast once
• three records in global flyer (RTW solo, solo distance, solo aloft)
• several prestigious gliding records in the same (or atleast a similar) glider
• several records for his RTW balloon flight (solo aloft, solo distance)
• several records in his Citation X (RTW and other speed records)

Fossett is a clear example that success breeds success. Corporations are willing to invest on people who have a history of success which Fossett clearly possessed. Fossett also had strong backing (social & financial) with his friend Richard Branson who was a like-minded, emphathetic adventurer. I don't know whether he came from a successful family or not (Garden Grove isn't particularly wealthy AFAIK), but its irrelevant because the man built his own empire. While money certainly helps, it doesn't buy access to Stanford or the UofW. Money doesn't buy a successful career as a stock broker or the determination to push yourself to physical and mental limits. Money buys opportunity, not achievement. The worldly value of his achievements may be brought into question, but his character or personal achievements shouldn't be marred by his financial success. LostCause 05:54, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Search for Fosset

I tried to join the Amazon Automatical Turk program but I was asked to read a picture for spam-protection with an handwriting or so impossible to read. I was dropped out... Is there any FAQ in the internet? Is it possible that in certain areas like canyons or mountains a radio wave from the Fossett's areoplane could not be received? Somehow the whole information is odd. -- Simplicius 22:26, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

most distress radios are omnidirectional, but if it was dropped in a canyon and ledged in the right location these could become heavily trapped, dependent on the makeup and depth of the canyon, it could be a situation where one would have to be directly overhead or at an odd angle to receive the signal properly. it is also as possible that, due to the no-power maneuverability of aircraft such as this, he was able to take it down in a crash format that might not have triggered the automatic trips for this. he also carried one on his arm that he would have to manually set, so if he is conscious and able he could trip the wrist set one if he deemed himself in need, but if he was disabled, it cannot be set. 12.41.116.4 18:41, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Simplicius, if you cannot read a word you can just try the next one. If he crashed into water, under trees or into an abandoned building the satelite images won't help. In any case, how many days could someone who can no longer build something that can be easily seen from the sky survive? Happily ever after 19:51, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Why didn't they just compare the old and new images on a computer, program the computer to note any differences that are the right size to be his plane, then scan them and pick out the once that could be the right shape, then let people manually look through them to decide which one is the most likely to be the plane? Also, the given location is very close to a lake where a monster is rumoured to live, so what if the plane crashed but he managed to swim to shore? Also, how do they know that his plane is within the box that they updated, I mean, he could have flown farther away from the aribase. Thanks. ~AH1^(TCU) 22:05, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

It's just not that easy. Keep in mind the kind of plane that Steve was flying...the Decathalon has fabric skin over a tubular steel fuselage truss and wood and aluminum wings. Balled up, it could easily fit into an area a couple of meters square. Burned, and all that would be left would be the fuselage tubing (tubes less than 1 inch thick) and the engine. Wreckage like that is almost impossible to distinguish from terrain clutter, and even if a person were to walk up to it, it would be hard to recognize as an airplane. There's a reason the CAP searchers have to go through a training and certification process...finding such a wreck is not an easy task. AKRadecki^Speaketh 22:15, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

I doubt this is the case, but I just feel like igniting a conspiracy theory. Having said, do you think Fosset may have gotten lost and flew over restricted airspace (Area 51?!?!?!?!) and was subsequently shot down? I know it's ridiculous but it seemed like an interesting take on what happened.--72.66.73.243 18:42, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Admin: please switch order of sections

Can the section on "awards and honors" be listed before the section on "disappearance"? It seems to me to be more appropriate that way. Nondistinguished 04:48, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Because awards and honors often come postumously, so that's why it is typically last in a biographical article. And, if Steve is found alive, then there will likely be other achievements that will come after the disappearance section, with the consequent honors. So, either way, it's better to leave the awards and honors section last. AKRadecki^Speaketh 13:13, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

I was the one who separated that into a separate section and placed it last. I did it that way because that is the most common placement for it in the vast majority of biography articles that I have seen. Hopefully there will not have to be any posthumous awards for Fossett for a long while, and that was not my reasoning; I only did it that way because it seems to be the most common practice (and that makes sense, because it is not strictly biographical information as most of the rest of the article is).--Gloriamarie 23:32, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Did

they find six other crashes? Do you know where?

As I had previously said, why did he not have better satellite communication, considering whatever millions, billions? I, also, have the same question regarding any employee of a significant electronic corporation.

Thank You,

[[ hopiakuta Please do sign your signature on your message. ~~ Thank You. -]] 19:35, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

We discuss the article here. When you find the answers to your questions perhaps your sources will be useful for the article. (SEWilco 04:05, 13 September 2007 (UTC))

GA

I have quick-failed this article at WP:GAC due to criterion 5 (stability) of the GA criteria. He just recently disappeared, and we don't know yet if he's dead or alive. When and if he does turn up dead, and this is confirmed, this article is very likely to undergo a very high volume of editing. Furthermore, looking at the article's past history, I see that it is already under a reasonably high volume of editing. So I think it's better to hold off awhile until his status is confirmed and his story falls off the front pages of much of the news media. After this occurs, please renominate it for GA status. Thanks! Dr. Cash 22:39, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

The Picture of Steve

Someone has edited (cropped) the picture that I put up of Steve...the one at the top right. It no longer carries my name as the photographer. Could someone please fix that? It was changed on September 5, 2007. NOTE CORRECTION. Thank you. ----

There were no edits to the article made on September 3rd, so I'm not sure which image you're talking about. The image that has been in place for months was cropped recently, but I don't see where the image ever included the photographer's name. The cropped image (image page) includes a link back to the original image (if you're concerned about credit). Bear in mind that if you provided an image as "Public Domain", then others have the right to alter and use your work as they see fit. Not also that Wikipedia has a strong perference against watermarking. If you have additional questions about this, please don't hesitate to ask. Rklawton 20:26, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

OKAY: 2 photo edits occurred after Steve went missing. The first edit (by Sinaloa at 8:28 on 5 September 07) was to bring in an old picture. The second photo edit (by FayssalF at 22:10 on 5 September 07)brought back the picture that was posted just prior and eliminates all the photo credit (which Wiki says is important and that the photographer is to be respected). Why crop the picture? The original picture showed respect to Fossett. And why has the photographer been dissed? YES, the original photo included the photographer's name. Pretty please. Could someone at least make the photographer's name appear as it used to before September?

I just restored the old image. Zamphuor 13:50, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Mountain Climbinb - Alborz in Europe?

Alborz seems to be located in Iran (which is not Europe, IIRC).
Maybe Mount_Elbrus in the Caucasus was meant? (And the Caucasus is used to define the border between Europe and Asia) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.144.118.2 (talk) 07:30, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

71.96.177.70 (talk) 07:55, 5 December 2007 (UTC)== Disappearance updates ==

We should be cautious about adding survivability statements. If he crashed he is more than likely dead by now. But an extensive search has not yet discovered any sign of wreckage, even though at least six previously undiscovered wrecks have been identified. I'm not giving any credence to the "conspiracy theories" that have been popping up, but nothing as yet has cleared up any of the mystery surrounding this event. --- Taroaldo 16:02, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't remember where I saw that his aircraft was of fabric-covered aluminum construction, which can easily lose its resemblance to an airplane. It can become hard to see. You might look for a source for that. (SEWilco 17:43, 18 September 2007 (UTC))

Yes, the Citabria is a fabric covered aircraft with a wood wing spar, and if there was a fire, the fabric covering and wood spar would be consumed, leaving only a charred metal framework, very hard to see. I wish there were a RS for that, though. Dhaluza 11:11, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Nitpick, I think a lot of the later Citabrias, Scouts, and Decathalons came from the factory with aluminum spars, or were so retrofitted. However, the aluminum spar is just as likely (if not more so) to be reduced to almost nothing in a fire. BoKu 22:29, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

It needs to be noted in the discussion re. the probable date of Steve Fossett's demise that he was more than likely wearing a watch called the "Emergency" crafted by Breitling. Wikipedia has an article listing famous owners of Breitling watches. Mr. Fossett was one of them. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breitling) The Emergency emits a signal that may be picked up by emergency search aircraft from up to 90 miles and 20,000 feet. Since the Emergency can only be activated manualy, Steve must have been unable to even perform this effort at the time of his presumed crash. This would mean he was either deceased or unconscious or paralized at the time of his crash. Another assumption one could make is that the watch was damaged upon impact, once again assuming he was wearing it. This is unlikely given the durability of these famous watches.

Sure would be nice to know he survived. [User: Frank] 1:54 AM December 5th, 2007.

Search for Fossett Called Off

Fossett is dead. The search has been called off, and he's not going to last long, assuming he is alive, in the Nevada desert. I ask that this be added to the article. Perhaps list his date of death as: September of 2007. This is all we can say due to the fact we don't know if he died the day of the crash, or if he lived for a few more days.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20892645/

There's the link to the article.

May he rest in peace.

65.255.130.104 03:54, 23 September 2007 (UTC) VonV

Looks like they're still looking for him, dead or alive. [1] Dstumme 13:29, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

According to FOX & Friends, the new search has been called off. There's no article available online yet that I can find. There's no scenario I can think of that he could still be alive and found before dieing without an ELT signal. If the ELT wasn't activated by the crash and he hasn't manually activated it, I can't see him still being alive.67.189.71.133 10:37, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure how reliable FOX & Friends is as a source, but other RS are reporting today that the search was ongoing as recently as yesterday. Dhaluza 11:08, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

There is a legal process for declairing someone dead when the body hasn't been found. I suggest we hold off on reporting him dead until that process has run its course. Rklawton 13:24, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree. The scheduling of searches is independent of the determination that a person has died. We should rely on a positive determination by an authoritative source declaring the subject dead before we make that designation. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 17:56, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Most likely, officials at some point will list him as "missing, presumed dead", and that is what we should use at that time as well. Before someone is actually declared dead after being missing, a whole lot more legal jumble will have to occur (can take years). --TheDJ (talk • contribs) 23:33, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Category:Disappeared people appears to be the appropriate category for such cases. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 00:12, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Should fall into the same category as Amelia Earhart whose death wasn't declared until a couple years after she went missing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.162.0.42 (talk) 12:51, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

With sadness, we should update his date of death

Experts, friends, and Sir Richard Branson are saying that he is probably dead. We should stop denying it and place his date of death. Why not follow the Amelia Earhart example which says

Amelia Mary Earhart (24 July 1897 – missing 2 July 1937, declared deceased 5 January 1939) was a noted American aviation pioneer

Steve Fosset could say

James Stephen Fossett (born April 22, 1944 - missing September 3, 2007) is an American aviator, sailor and adventurer

so it's not declaring he's dead. The way it's now, we are denying what reliable sources say. Chergles 19:17, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

No death categories yet, but I think that a (birth to missing) bit in the header would not be inappropriate. - TexasAndroid 19:52, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, we sort of have to wait for a declaration of deceasedment so we can do citationment. There does seem to be missingment. (SEWilco 20:18, 16 October 2007 (UTC))

How about the implicationment of the subjectment being eaten by large canine carnivorement? Was that citedment or arbitraryment? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.177.244.246 (talk) 14:18, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

It is considered vandalism here to state the obvious: that Mr. Fosset's plane crashed in the Nevada desert, that he was injured, possibly killed, in the proces, and that either he or his remains were preyed on by one or more local carnivorous predators. Well, good luck on getting that 'good article' patch, then. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.177.244.31 (talk) 15:04, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it is vandalism to say so authoritatively in the absence of credible sources or evidence that such is the case. It's certainly vandalism to say that he or his remains were eaten by a "30-foot-tall coyote" as you have written. Besides, it is as yet unknown that he crashed in the desert - some searchers have said that they believe that he ditched in Walker Lake or crashed on the eastern slopes of the Sierra Nevada. There has also been private speculation that he might have "disappeared" himself for whatever reason. All of that stuff is pretty well covered by the "missing" status given above. BoKu 22:26, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Walker Lake has been scanned and no trace of Fossett has been found. The speculations of Fossett "dissapearing" himself "for whatever reason" are not backed by any direct or circumstancial fact. That leaves the desert crash as most likely option. Of course if you want to, you can claim that Fossett "might have" been obducted by aliens, but I don't think that will add to the cause of Wikipedia being taken seriously as a source of information. As for the coyote: coyotes do live in the Nevada desert. They are carnivourous. If you end up injured or dead in that area, there's a very good chance that you or your remains will be taken by them, in Fossett's case the odds for that ar higher than those for the claim that might have "dissapeared" himself" (with as little fuel as he had on board? Come on). The hypothesis of a carnivorous predator would also explain the fact that Fossetts body has not been recovered, while several plane wrecks have. If you like to play Omniscient God by omitting all these valid theories in favour of your own, with nothing more than a typo to justify your actions, you're doing nothing for Wikipedia, but everything for the case of those who oppose it and seek to deny it any credibility as a source. But hey, no skin off my nose, and no business off mine if you want to indulge in Diderot-like fantasies of your own. If that's the case, delete all you want, but don't ever again claim Wikipedia is a viable source of information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.177.246.126 (talk) 19:39, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

You people petitioning to list Fossett as dead should be ashamed of yourselves. He's missing. Presumed dead. It's that simple. Those wanting to list him as dead obviously get off thinking that they're going to be the ones telling everyone he is dead. Grow up and get a life away from the computer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.202.60.120 (talk) 13:34, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Giving the recent news from his wife, perhaps we should add a (-2007?) to the birthdate entry in the opening line? His status remains uncertain, but if he's legally declared to be dead, we ought to include such a caveat. MalikCarr (talk) 21:57, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Cook County hasn't yet acted on Mrs. Fossett's petition. If and when they do, I'd say that's probably an appropriate time to past-tense this article. Not before that, though. Thanks, Bob "BoKu" K, BoKu (talk) 22:39, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

There seem to be some terrible zealous editors watching this article. It seemed to take forever for the editors even to agree the guy was missing. Now that he's been missing for several months, and is almost certainly dead, the article still says that Fossett "is" an explorer, etc, in the first sentence. I changed it to "is - or was -" and got an email saying I'd "vandalised" the article. Stating the bleeding obvious is not vandalism, guys. I didn't say he was dead, just acknowledged that he might be. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.141.88.96 (talk) 22:39, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm one of those editors, but far from the only one. The consensus seems to be that when Cook County grants Mrs. Fossett's petition, or when conclusive evidence of death is found, that'll be a good time to go with "was" instead of "is." Until then, the qualification "who has been missing since..." and subsequent material regarding his disappearrance and the petition seems the most reasonable and objective approach. BoKu (talk) 02:17, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Keep in mind that we report truth about living people (see WP:BLP) and we think it's just not acceptable to say that a living person is dead. So we let the article wait until there is something to change in it. If someone thinks Fossett's status is wrong, they can either ignore the article for a while or get trained so they can safely look for him. -- SEWilco (talk) 04:05, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

It's a moot point now. Fossett was declared legally dead on 15 February2008 by a Cook County, Illinois Circuit Court judge. —Quicksilver^{T @} 02:29, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

What is his legal date of death then? Sept 3? Feb 15? Or somewhere in between? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.143.121.49 (talk) 15:53, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree. The long-winded and convoluted wording in the intro and fact box looks odd. It should simply state the legally recognised date of death. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.141.88.124 (talk) 09:46, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

search as a separate article

The search section sounds like a newspaper. There are not daily updates about Fossett's other adventures. I will start a sub-article about the search and condense this article's search section to a much shorter section. If objections, let me know here. Nothing to fight about but I think now the article looks like a very stable and balanced article. One third of it no longer deals with the search but is just a part of an article about his great life (and hopefully first 75% of his life with the remaining 25% yet to be lived.....in other words, hope he's found safe and sound living in a cabin with a sore hip that prevented him from walking much to get help)Chergles 18:57, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree with trimming the search section. While this was constantly in the news people of course wanted to keep all the details up to date as a current event, but now its a bit too much. Personally I dont think a seperate article is nessisary for the search, I would think simply trimming the existing section to be fine. Russeasby 23:44, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

"Airplane" versus "Fixed-wing aircraft"

I personally believe that "fixed wing aircraft" is a terribly convoluted and unnecessarily polysyllabic way of saying "airplane." However, I concede that this probably isn't the place to re-hash that issue. Interested parties can find more here.BoKu 00:23, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Boku. You're right: the issue has been discussed at the relevant page. What it all boils down to, quite simply, is this: while it's true that "fixed-wing aircraft" may seem unnecessarily complicated compared with a single word, the fact is that the English language does not have a single international equivalent. In North America the word "airplane" is used; in the rest of the English-speaking world, "aeroplane" is used. Since there is only one Wikipedia for the English language, the accepted policy is that internationally-neutral words should be used where possible. This is usually not a problem - however, in the case of "aircraft" (an international word), it is then pointed out that the definition of "aircraft" includes things like helicopters and balloons, among other things. So "fixed-wing aircraft" is the compromise which has been agreed upon by common consensus. It's not perfect - everyone admits that - but while we have a single English-language encyclopædia which has to satisfy a world in which we have many regional variations, it's the best we've currently got. Thanks, EuroSong ^talk 00:59, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

I have to disagree on the use of "fixed wing aircraft". That term could be used to describe a glider as well, which is certainly not what Fossett was flying in this case (though he is a noted glider pilot as well). The point is, the term is too general and completely inappropriate, especially since he flew gliders as well. Airplane or Aeroplane should be used. Using other WP guidelines for Brit vs US terms, I would say that since this article is about an american then the american version of Airplane is more appropriate. There is not an english speaker out there that would scratch their head upon reading the article and wonder "what is an airplane?". Russeasby 14:56, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Just because the US and British way of saying something are different doesn't mean we should avoid the terms entirely. There is no universal way of writing "colour" (or "color") but that doesn't mean we should avoid the word. "airplane" is much simpler than "fixed wing aircraft" and we should use it. 199.71.183.2 15:00, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

I disagree. Colo[u]r is a minor matter of spelling preference, wheras aeroplane/airplane is a matter of separate regional dialect. In an international encyclopædia, no preference should be shown towards one particilar dialect to the exclusion of others when there are available internationally neutral terms. Anyway - as was said earlier, this is not the place to discuss it. It' already been discussed to death on the relevant page. EuroSong ^talk 13:02, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

i would have thought that the spirit of wiki would mean whatever is most factual should be in use.....regardless of trying to keep the peace over the fact we all live in different areas of this big ole rock! i'd vote for airplane....i dont want to be mislead by people being pc into thinking it may have been a glider he was flying at first glance of this article...lets get some clarity, less trying to please everybody! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.107.6.35 (talk) 00:24, 16 March 2008 (UTC)