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:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
So this page has been tagged as a copy-vio, but nowhere does it say the alleged source of the copyvio. Could someone please fix the initial tag so I can do some research and/or rewrite the page if there's a problem? --Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû (blah?)17:24, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The source is allegedly http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19660124-0, but as far as I can tell the only paragraph affected is "sequence of events". A second section, "Investigation" also has similar text, but both pages are quoting from the same accident report. It strikes me as overkill to swap out an entire page for a copyvio template when all that's called for is a simple rewrite of one paragraph. Hairhorn (talk) 06:15, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Investigation verifies that the material was published there prior to its use here (see 2006 archives, here) Since both documents cite the same source and this material was pasted into the article at inception, it's very possible that all the text in this version is copied. It you're willing to work on new text, Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû, that would be fabulous. --Moonriddengirl(talk)19:19, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Nobody was hurt and youtube is probably not a RS, but interesting IMO. I will look for other sources... any help appreciated. Andrewa (talk) 15:12, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The conspiracy theory
I'm going to remove the consipracy theory, per WP:FRINGE. The only real source we have is the conspiracy theorist's book. The final sentence of the paragraph is not supported by the sources. The only coverage in RS is the Times of India story, which calls it "an alleged conversation" and says it was reported "by a relatively unknown news media TBRNews.org" which is not RS. GA-RT-22 (talk) 17:20, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Change Title to "Air India Flight 101 (1966)" due to Possible Confusion with Other Flight
Another flight, Air India 101 from Delhi to JFK (New York), had an incident in 2018, rendering the title of this article outdated. Therefore, users may get confused upon opening this article. Pierre151 (talk) 15:45, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]