Talk:Boeing 737

message: change the lead image to boeing 737 Iraqi airways
And add the Iraqi airways to the premium users Taha16joker (talk) 15:05, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Please post the image here that you want to use for consideration. Note that the purpose of the image in the Infobox is to clearly show the aircraft, preferably in flight and often the most common variant.  This is not to show off a certain operator, special livery, etc. -Fnlayson (talk) 15:56, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: The suggested image of YI-ASF :File:Iraqi Airways Boeing 737-81Z at Munich Airport.jpg that User:Taha16joker was trying to add to the article is not suitable as User:Fnlayson has explained, it is a landing shot with a cluttered background and airborne shots will aways be prefered, the airline is not relevant to picture choice. MilborneOne (talk) 19:01, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with MilborneOne.--Iovecodeabc (talk) 22:29, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Change the image 

message: , : First thing I noticed on reading this article was all the incorrect minus signs. I assumed these were just typos and was getting ready to fix them when I found an old talk page discussion that indicates this was done intentionally to confound a misbehaving bot. This seems very wrong to me. These should be changed to hyphens. Then if someone (or some thing) changes them to dashes, that person, or the person who controls the thing, should be reverted and told not to do it again. GA-RT-22 (talk) 02:06, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: If you read carefully, the last archived discussion was mainly about bots incorrectly putting ndashes in the model and variant designations, e.g. 737-100.  These are NOT number ranges. So ndashes are not appropriate per MOS. Simple dashes or hyphens are more fitting for these. -Fnlayson (talk) 23:17, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minus signs again 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:29, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:52, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: I've heard a theory posts that Boeing 737's main landing gears does not have door is because this type lowered cabin floor so the cabin could have more space to save more luggage into cabin. Is it right? --Great Brightstar (talk) 13:05, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: As I recall, the gear wheel forms part of the door due to limited space. I think this is due to using original layout and design for larger variants with larger wheels and/or gear hardware. I'll try looking for a source for this... -Fnlayson (talk) 14:51, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  Lighter, less parts thus less cost and less maintenance. No wheel well doors is common for medium range aircraft, eg Airbus A220 (see ref [132] there), Embraer E-Jet, ATR42/72, Pilatus PC-24..., until the small aero gain overturn the weight and complexity.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 14:59, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

text: * Users asking questions like these can mean that the information is not covered in the article or the coverage is poor or vague. Regards -Fnlayson (talk) 18:03, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sorry, can you please move this topic to other place such as WP:RD? Thanks. -- Great Brightstar (talk) 13:09, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question for wheel wells 

message: There is a discrepancy between delivery table in the article with the Boeing database (O&D):
Delivery Year :      |Total|2022|2021|2020|2019|...|1967|
Deliveries (WP) :    |11,264|387|263|43|127|...|4|
Deliveries (O&D):    |11,112|386|261|41|126|...|4|
Should it be synced/fixed? Ich-Du-De (talk) 05:20, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, it was my mistake I forgot to check the 737BBJ, so case closed! Ich-Du-De (talk) 05:48, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Delivery table discrepancy with Boeing database (O&D) 

message: Please note that I have (mostly) reverted your reversion of my insertion of the phrase "world's most popular jetliner", because -- CONSISTENT with WP:PUFFERY section "Anti-"reliable sources"-ism", I've included it as THE single most important fact about the 737.  To accommodate your sensitivity to the language, I've replaced "most popular" with the less vague, more purely-factual, "most-numerous".  While some who are fans of rival Airbus may take issue with this (and Airbus has recently outsold the 737), it remains the incontrovertible fact (well documented in my insertion, with another source added) that there have been more 737s built than any other jetliner.   THAT, alone, is THE primary reason for the plane's WP:notability. Please do not revert, but read my edit notes (in View History), and then discuss here, for all to see.
:~ Zxtxtxz (talk) 14:19, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The 737 is notable anyway, as is the A320 - and they will both remain notable regardless of which one has the most sales or deliveries. Rosbif73 (talk) 14:30, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Most important fact about 737 -- numbers -- not WP:Puffery 

message: The article for the 737-300 cites that Boeing wanted to give the -300 more range than the -200Adv. But this article cites the -200 having MORE range than the -300 despite this? Can someone clear this up? Looking at the cited graph confuses me, as the graph seems to show the max range you can have with highest payload possible is around 1750 nmi. CorpSimmons (talk) 16:31, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:NOTFORUM: we're not here to discuss technicalities (albeit I assume many editors are knowledgeable enough) but to discuss the encyclopedic content of the article. Maybe try airliners.net or comparable forums.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 20:00, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  737-300 is supposed to have more range than the -200?