Talk:Impact of culture on aviation safety

This article has good interesting topic with reliable descriptions and examples. By reading through, I was able to understand the topic clearly. On the other hand, I also have few suggestions for this article. I think you need more detailed information on abstract paragraph so that readers can get overall knowledge of what this article is about without reading the whole page. Also, for the "past incidents" title, I think it is better to change the word type to sub-title with underline so that the article has more clear layout. And I also think you need some links to other wiki pages, so that readers can click on the link and get information when they are not clear with certain word. It is good article overall!! Dhur2 (talk) 21:06, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

To improve your article, you can expand more on introduction by stating a general idea of how cultures around the world are different and in my personal opinion, I don't think you need to include "this page talks about..." in the abstract. You can change your writing style by stating the main points of the arguments at the very beginning of the paragraphs instead of describing what you are going to write about. Also, try linking your article with other articles so other people can get more knowledge about your topic. Overall it has many reliable sources and it is an interesting topic to study about! Hhur2 (talk) 21:24, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Article's balance seems unfixable

The page's overall premise is inherently unscientific and based on old hat stereotyping, and I worry the page is crippled without mention of that in some way. As is, the article treats the idea that a clash of generalized "Western" and "Eastern" mindsets (i.e. lame stereotyping) between employees can lead to disaster. Then to support this argument, the page uses anecdotes that show nothing about the actual decision-making of the crews involved (largely because they died horribly in plane crashes and weren't around to give us their thoughts afterwards). In one case, where a writer theorizes that a subordinate pilot was too shy because of their Asian "collectivist" nature, I don't even see the obvious counterargument that perhaps decisions were made because of corporate training/state protocols, or personality issues unrelated to nationality (like maybe the employee was, le gasp, simply shy, or in shock, or playing Candy Crush). Unfortunately, unless the premise is reworked and the content completely reframed, perhaps as a corporate training phenomena, I can't even think of a way to balance this page out. The balance hatnote should stay for now, although I intended to improve the page and remove it. 162.219.131.183 (talk) 20:35, 4 May 2023 (UTC)