The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. (closed by non-admin page mover) Extraordinary Writ (talk) 04:54, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Aeropostal Alas de Venezuela Flight 108 → Aeropostal Alas de Venezuela Flight 109 – The flight number was 109 not 108. I could not find a direct final report but I could find a video describing the final report here: [1] where in one of the scenes, it mentioned that the flight number was 109. The Aviation safety network also mentions it as flight 109. Username006 (talk) 17:02, 28 December 2021 (UTC)— Relisting. Jerm (talk) 21:28, 5 January 2022 (UTC)— Relisting. -- Aervanath (talk) 20:29, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Aviation has been notified of this discussion. ASUKITE 15:19, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose - "109" is most likely a typo, given that a vast majority of sources use "108". Also of note is the fact that it is customary for airlines to retire flight numbers which were involved in fatal accidents. "Aeropostal Alas de Venezuela Flight 109" has been active as recently as September 2017, while "Aeropostal Alas de Venezuela Flight 108" does not appear to have been used since the accident. - ZLEA _T\^C 18:10, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@ZLEA: The vast majority of sources may use 108 but that's mainly because Wikipedia mentions it. The final report mentions it as 330/109. Sure Flight numbers may be retired but there are some exceptions to it American Airlines Flight 1 (1962). Username006 (talk) 04:06, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Username006 Sure, it may very well have been an exception, but that doesn't explain why "Aeropostal Alas de Venezuela Flight 108" isn't used anymore. Furthermore, a Google search of Aeropostal Alas de Venezuela Flight 108 and Aeropostal Alas de Venezuela Flight 109 from before January 1, 2010 (just under a month before this article was created) brings up very little results, none of which are directly related to this topic. Are there any other official documents which refer to the flight as "Flight 109"? - ZLEA _T\^C 04:17, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Conflicting sources I've seen, that's for sure. Some articles say 108, the Diccionario General de Zulia cites flight 109 https://books.google.com/books?id=5XlGDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA1944&lpg=PA1944&dq=%22Aeropostal%22+%22marzo+de+1991%22+-wikipedia&source=bl&ots=DUzI16GaWe&sig=ACfU3U3QiULQjQ3ahblepFGY_yPvuCNKgg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj7gsvG-7L1AhW0IEQIHYrhBDcQ6AF6BAgbEAM#v=onepage&q=%22Aeropostal%22%20%22marzo%20de%201991%22%20-wikipedia&f=false , and the images of period articles don't mention a flight number at all (mostly calling it a DC-9). What a baffler. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 05:46, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the official report does mention it as 109. Not considering as a source but other languages (i.e. Deutsch and Español) both mention it as Flight 109. Username006 (talk) 04:21, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]