Talk:McDonnell Douglas MD-80
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the McDonnell Douglas MD-80 article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: 1 |
 | This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=small} | Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org |
MD-88 picture change? edit
The picture for the MD-88 section should be changed. It's at a weird angle, faces away from the text, and is the third Iberia MD-80. It should be changed to a Delta example, considering they were the largest operator of the type. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pabst blue ribbon led zeppelin (talk • contribs) 20:46, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
- You should show the pictures you are talking about. "Largest operator" livery does not matter. What matters is depicting what is specific to the variant. By reading the text, it appears to be mainly the EFIS cockpit.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 08:36, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
Mad Dog edit
I noted that my recent edit ([1]) was reverted ([2]) by User:Nigel Ish with the note revert apparent vandalism. A brief google search will show that the McDonnell Douglas MD-80 is indeed nicknamed Mad Dog. See https://www.aerotime.aero/23903-mad-dog-md-80-still-barking for an example. To avoid any risk of edit warring, I will not re-add the information but invite other editors so to do. Greenshed (talk) 09:40, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, that is a nickname, but no reason to suggest that is a significant alternate name with bold formatting. I think it would be more appropriate to mention it later in the article, like in the Operational history section. -Fnlayson (talk) 16:08, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
Flight 964 edit
May 13, 1998, American Airlines Flight 964 14 5 Crews 2:55AM to 4:10AM 6 kill 4 survied 2001:8003:244A:6501:D0C8:E366:2EA0:5C75 (talk) 05:22, 3 April 2024 (UTC)