Talk:Jeremy Glick

This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:

Keep, 16 June 2005, see discussion.
Delete, 19 June 2007, see discussion.

Reverted edits by 68.89.255.254 (talk · contribs)[edit]

Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. While many believe the plane was targeted at the U.S. Capitol, it is speculation. And, even if the plane was crashed into the Capitol, the building was already evacuated and few or any people on the ground would have been killed. So, "no doubt he saved many lives" is far from certain. -Aude (talk contribs) 00:34, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jewish American Sportsperson?[edit]

Why is this guy down as a Jewish American sportsperson. He may have been Jewish and American but nothing about the article suggests that he was a sportsperson of any note. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Saluedo (talk • contribs) 17:11, 5 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

There is already some reference that he was a Judo champion.. here is another if it helps: http://espn.go.com/columns/wojnarowski/1251966.html Centerone (talk) 10:18, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confusions[edit]

when I clicked on "Jeremy Glick" at "Flight 93" wiki article, it redirected to "Flight 93 National Memorial".
there's confucion with the names, as it says on this page that Jeremy Glick's father, Barry Glick, actually died in the 9/11 attacks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.99.193.226 (talk) 01:28, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barry Glick who died in the WTC on 9/11 is the father of Jeremy M. Glick who is very much alive. Jeremy L. Glick, who this article is about, died in flight 93. Centerone (talk) 09:54, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Jeremy Glick. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:05, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with this sentence[edit]

"During a struggle to reclaim the aircraft, it crashed into a field in Stonycreek Township near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, killing all 33 passengers and seven crew members on board."

In this article https://www.deseret.com/platform/amp/2004/7/25/19841866/9-11-report-details-the-struggle-on-flight-93 it says the pilots were believed to be stabbed to death.

If that is true, then how can the crash kill everyone on board? How can one die twice!?!

Nobody who was there is alive to tell us what happened, and saying either that the pilots were alive or that they were dead is speculation, but it seems that the consensus is that the pilots were probably dead. So that sentence makes no sense if that was what actually happened, and I don't know why my edit was reversed. Please, someone, tell me how anyone can die twice.Gandalfo Gris (talk) 01:36, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The truth is that any statement on the deaths before the crash is pure speculation, as no-one survived. There is no consensus that the pilots were killed before the crash or just injured and held back. In my opinion ,the sentence as originally written is far better and you should wait for other editors input.. Regards, David J Johnson (talk) 11:04, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That article is written in a slightly odd way and I would be leery of using it as a source. By itself it does not establish consensus that the pilots were dead. Now, if there are several other sources backing up the claim then that changes things. One possibility is to mention the discrepancy in a footnote. It is also possible that a WP:RFC might be needed to get more input on the situation. MarnetteD|Talk 16:13, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a pretty in-depth source; there is an *alleged* death, from someone who not only heard the non-public audio but has in depth experience with the matter. I am saying that there is ambiguity, not consensus. Right now, the sentence implies the consensus is that the impact itself killed all of the victims, and there isn't even a source for this "consensus", i think. https://www.denverpost.com/2006/04/12/flight-93-tape-horror-heroics/amp/ Gandalfo Gris (talk) 21:55, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There may be a better way to word it but at present I prefer that everyone died in the crash as the best of the known details since there were no survivors and it is not known with absolute certainty that anyone definitely died prior to impact.--MONGO (talk) 22:25, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]