Talk:1973 Concorde eclipse flight

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 not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

Astronomy: Eclipses Low‑importance

	Astronomy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Eclipses task force.

A fact from 1973 Concorde eclipse flight appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 27 May 2024 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that on June 30, 1973, scientists set the record for the longest observation of a total solar eclipse, at 74 minutes of totality?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2024/May. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/1973 Eclipse Flight of Concorde 001.

Wikipedia

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Launchballer talk 10:39, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that on June 30, 1973, scientists aboard the Concorde 001 experienced 74 minutes of totality during a solar eclipse?

Source: [1]

ALT1: ... that on June 30, 1973, scientists set the record for the longest total eclipse observation ever: 74 minutes of totality? Source: [2]
Reviewed:

Created by Samsmachado (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has less than 5 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Samsmachado (talk) 00:46, 29 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

The article was nominated within the time scale and is long enough. Earwig suggests no copyright violation—a short quotation is properly attributed. The image is PD. QPQ stands at 4—not required. All references to which I have access check out, except "The Concorde's 74 minutes of totality remains the longest total eclipse observation." I couldn't find this in Hatherill (but it may be in Pappalardo, which I have taken on trust). Pappalardo is also the attribution for both hooks, so assuming GF. The "hold" may be quickly disposed of if Hatherill isn't used for "longest flight"

This is only my second DYK review—oversight welcome. --AntientNestor (talk) 16:03, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the Hatherill for longest flight. I did add a 2010 Wired article instead to try and back it up with a source that wasn't paywalled. (Grossman: "The longest totality ever observed by an experimental aircraft was 74 minutes, captured by a supersonic Concorde aircraft in 1973. .") Samsmachado (talk) 21:38, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I did just go through this with Earwig, and actually there are a couple of phrases that need changing.--Laun chba ller 11:53, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I just tweaked some of the phrases Earwig flagged. Mostly it's picking out attributed quotations and a few things that I would call broadly 'terms', in the sense that they can't really be re-worded because that's just what they are (ie. "four twin-spool Olympus 593 engines", " oxygen atoms in the Earth's atmosphere", "the path of a total solar eclipse"). Launchballer, if you have any specific concerns within those, please flag them. Samsmachado (talk) 21:36, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New reference supplied to replace Hatherill. The close wording of some phrases used in the article do not constitute copyvios. AGF with the sources, All set.--AntientNestor (talk) 09:03, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]