Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 was one of the Engineering and technology good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Text has been copied to or from this article; see the list below. The source pages now serve to provide attribution for the content in the destination pages and must not be deleted as long as the copies exist. For attribution and to access older versions of the copied text, please see the history links below.
Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia
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
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles 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.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related
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
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations 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.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Malaysia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Malaysia and Malaysia-related topics 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.MalaysiaWikipedia:WikiProject MalaysiaTemplate:WikiProject MalaysiaMalaysia
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
This article is within the scope of WikiProject 2010s, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 2010s 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.2010sWikipedia:WikiProject 2010sTemplate:WikiProject 2010s2010s
This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) 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.
Jack Pickell (12 March 2014). "9 crazy conspiracy theories about Malaysia Airlines flight 370". Boston.com. Archived from the original on 15 March 2014. Retrieved 12 November 2014. 6. The Illuminati is involved: 'Was looking at the Wikipedia page for the missing Malaysia Airlines, and noticed that it's was [sic] the 404th 777 Boeing produced,' Redditor i-am-SHER-locked wrote. 'An HTTP 404 error mean [sic] not found, which in this case is oddly approiate [sic] for the status of the aircraft, or just a concidence [sic]. Coincidence, i think not!'
This article has been viewed enough times in a single year to make it into the Top 50 Report annual list. This happened in 2014, when it received 7,601,345 views.
This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report9 times. The weeks in which this happened:
Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. Updates on reimplementing the Graph extension, which will be known as the Chart extension, can be found on Phabricator and on MediaWiki.org.
Oddly, the article does not mention basic information about the captain: his creed (he was Muslim), and his marital status (his wife was separating from him). This information was briefly available in the media in the days after the disappearance, and I am sure a Wikipedia expert will have no problem retrieving those reports using archive websites. I myself do not have that level of web expertise. 46.6.212.232 (talk) 22:13, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hiya. Under this section, & subsection of 'Unresponsive crew or hypoxia', the following first sentence in the subsection is incorrect- 'The analysis of the flaperon showed that the landing flaps were not extended, supporting the spiral dive at high speed theory'. It was actually analysis of the right wing inboard flap piece that showed the flap (from where this piece came) was not extended. The flaperon was never able to provide any evidence of having been retracted or extended. Having said this, do you think it's worthwhile rejigging the sentence/paragraph to show the correct scenario? Thanks Mickey Smiths (talk) 14:10, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that CNN source says: "“Additionally, the wing flap debris analysis reduced the likelihood of end-of-flight scenarios involving flap deployment.”" I agree it should be corrected. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:23, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What was originally written was incorrect. What I amanded was factually correct. The Seal Pan Cavity of the right inboard flap piece is covered in the 440 page official ATSB report. You must make the distinction between the recovered flaperon & the recovered flap piece; they are not the same. If someone can add the ATSB report as a reference (I don't know how to do that), then re-amend the sentence back to what I had written, it will be factually corrrect. This YouTube video covers the Seal Pan Cavity in detail- https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=plSIAPDW1Tk&pp=ygUGI20zNzAyMickey Smiths (talk) 02:30, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don’t see an issue. Just to flag, a post here on talk page is generally best for when you want to socialise or discuss a potential change or issue, not for posting at the same time or after you’ve made the change in question anyway. I see your change as minor and not needing a talk post. Whisky and more (talk) 22:30, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is a hidden note next to the caption that says <!--DO NOT CHANGE WITHOUT FORMING CONSENSUS ON TALK PAGE--> which means that you have to gain consensus here before making any change to the caption. It has probably been discussed before and if you trawl through the Talk page archives you might find a previous discussion with reasons for not including the aircraft's registration in the caption. Personally, I don't see the need. Keep it simple and a one-liner, as is. Rodney Baggins.talk.08:35, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I do agree on this, but shouldn't we at LEAST add "9M-MRO" to the beginning so it's "9M-MRO, the missing aircraft pictured in December 2011"? There, it's simple, yet lets aviation-lovers or workers see it more easily rather than zooming into the picture and trying to see what registration it is. It's totally fine if we don't do this, but it's just a registration name! Shouldn't we keep it "uniform" and the same as all other aviation accident pages? Is this the only one that stands out? Please consider this. It's short, simple, and gives a better summary all-in-one caption.
It seems unlikely that any of those onboard have remained alive but undiscovered after more than 11 years? Where do you suppose they might be? And the description "deadliest" is used many times in the lead section and in the main body of the article. But I note that the claim that it is the single deadliest case of aircraft disappearance is not mentioned in the main body and seems to be unsourced. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:06, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
.svg){kind=logo}
