Mile high club was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. 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.
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 not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked
Coverage and accuracy: not checked
Structure: not checked
Grammar and style: not checked
Supporting materials: not checked
To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality 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.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality
Likewise, there is no evidence that Sperry created, used, or was aware of the term "Mile High Club", so associating his name with 'founding' the MHC can be considered an urban legend.
The reason I am not comfortable with this paragraph in the article page is that it is pretty much "beating a dead horse", also IMHO bordering on original research. Nowhere else it says that he created, used, or was aware of the term. When aviators (and others; see the milehighclub site) call him the "founding member" they relate to the fact that he is apparently the first aviator ever engaging in this kind of activities while piloting an airplane. BACbKA 19:25, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Hi BACbKA, I think your point about beating a dead horse is well founded. On the other hand I want to explain that the conclusion he never used the term was arrived at by searching through articles on the MHC, and was not original research. (I know you used the qualifier "borderline") I do think the whole section on Perry (including the semi-rebuttal) could stand improvement. Please tell me what you think about this version:
The first and founding member of the MHC is generally considered to be Lawrence Sperry, inventor of the autopilot. In November of 1916 he reportedly was engaged in sexual activity with a woman while he was flying in his Curtiss flying boat over Babylon, New York, when they crashed into the water. His status as founder of the club is a retrospective honor derived from the fact that he is the first person reported to have engaged in aerial sexual activity, and from his association with the development of the autopilot at Sperry Corporation. It is not a literal honor since they crashed from an altitude of only 500 feet, and since the term "Mile High Club" was not in use at the time.
I think this is a better explanation of Perry and his accomplishment. It blends in better with the other part of the article, and removes the "dubious claim" phrase which didn't seem like good wording. Johntex 20:30, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
The caterpillar club is for folks who have made an emergency bailout. The two activities seem pretty unrelated. I do know of a couple who had sex while strapped together both in freefall and under canopy, but I'm not sure that's what you mean. Rklawton18:30, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't there a club for pilot who have died trying to meet the qualifications for the Mile High club? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Smith Jones (talk • contribs).
I'm the one who put it in this time. (I didn't know it had been in before.) It didn't seem very commercial to me -- mostly just stuff about the club, humorous stories, etc., with one page that sells a few souvenirs. Since there aren't any other references in the article, I thought it would be a good addition. Lou Sander03:28, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
My main concern with listing that site is that it could be misinterpreted. I don't want anyone to get the impression that this commercial site is somehow the creator of this concept or the sponsor of some sort of official club. They have no more and no less right to sell some merchandise around the idea of having sex in the air as anyone else does. There are other businesses that attempt to make money off the concept. If we list just one, then we are playing favorites. List them all, and we have an ugly list of links. How would we objectively decide which ones to list and which ones to ommitt?
If we just want to prove the concept exists, then let's add links to news articles. I am adding one USA Today reference right now. Johntex\talk02:11, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I reworked the external links as references. I think this looks more scholarly and avoids giving the appearance that we are supporting one particular commercial site. I also added the new reference from USA Today. Please let me know what you think. Johntex\talk02:20, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I very much like the reworking of the links as references, but I don't much like relegating MileHighClub.com to the role of a souvenir shop. The site has a pretty good amount of info about the "club," and a pretty small amount of material about souvenirs. So far, the best explanation I've seen about the MHC, and the most authoritative and inclusive reference, is MileHighClub.com. (They also sell souvenirs, just as do most universities, professional athletic teams, national parks, etc.) Lou Sander03:01, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Mark specific problematic phrases - with {{fact}} as per policy. Policy does not require all unsourced statements to be removed. This is a fairly short article yet it has 5 distinct in-line sources. Please hit the random article button a few times. How many articles do you hit with no in-line sources at all? How many featured articles contain at least some statements that are not specifically sourced? For instance - Ahmose I - today's featured article contains several sentences with no source:
"There was no distinct break in the line of the royal family between the 17th and 18th dynasties."
"The Thera eruption in the Aegean has been implicated by some scholars as the source of this damage, but similar claims are common in the propaganda of other pharaohs, to show them overcoming the powers of darkness. Due to the lack of evidence, no definitive conclusion can be reached."
"Although the pyramid interior has not been explored since 1902, work in 2006 uncovered portions of a massive mudbrick construction ramp built against its face."
Sorry, I had intended to revert the large chunks that Cyberanth had removed, and seem to have reverted other stuff by mistake. My apologies, I'll try to be more careful in the future. Atom18:46, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There is a template on this page requesting a photograph.
Can anyone think of a non-prurient photograph that would be appropriate for this page, or would improve the article in any meaningful way? It's an amusing request but I think it should be removed if no one can suggest a photograph that would be helpful here. Tim Pierce23:29, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If you really MUST have an image, this one would do:Official Hot Air Balloon of the Mile High Club (Tethered flights do not qualify participants for membership in the Club)Lou Sander03:30, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have removed the template. What is a reader supposed to gain from a photo on this article? "Oh, that's what you mean by have sex on an airplane!" I think the article can do without. — Swpbtalk|edits15:46, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Quickfail article lacks enough in-line citation. It has next to no chance of passing as is. Article smacks of WP:OR and lack any images whatsoever. -- SECisek (talk) 22:55, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was under the impression that images were only recommended, not required. If you can name a type of image that should be in this article I'll add it, but I didn't want to just add photos of planes to make it look pretty. Vicarious (talk) 23:07, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The external link to milehighspy looks like SPAM. User milehighspy tried to insert it several times, and when rebuffed, 99.178.101.22 inserted it again, so that's possible sockpuppeting.
Is it worth mentioning under "Legality" , the situation of head-count errors vis-a-vis
Flightplan(movie) senario or the like? (load distribution is a triviality I suppose in this case)
There may be some suitable photo, such as Hugh Hefner's plane or with Betty Page painted on
Since when did Wikipedia start encouraging articles like these? Strongly Recommend a massive trim down with only a definition. If it is a joke it is a pretty bad one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.172.2.210 (talk) 17:59, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It is a common term and cultural reference, hence is has an article. If you do not like it, do not look it up, or close it when you see what it is about.Wzrd1 (talk) 15:54, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Supposedly all residents of the city of Denver qualify for the mile high club, due to the altitude of the city, which is known as The Mile-High City.--Auric (talk) 17:42, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There is no need for an "explanation for the act", certainly not the speculative and rather bizarre claim "One explanation for the act is the vibration of the plane, which may speed or improve arousal".Royalcourtier (talk) 06:51, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
"The model-turned-actress spilled her mile-high club secrets to LOVE Magazine."
"I had sex in the chair on the plane and there was a guy watching," Delevingne revealed. "We ended up telling the air stewardess what was happening. Like, 'This guy keeps staring at us. Can you tell him to stop?'" — Preceding unsigned comment added by B3charlie (talk • contribs) 10:16, 23 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have just modified 4 external links on Mile high club. 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: 5 June 2024).
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.
I have just modified one external link on Mile high club. 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: 5 June 2024).
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.
The claim about Oswald Boelcke having sex in the cockpit of his fighter is ridiculous. You won't find one single period account suggesting that he did anything more than take a nurse up for a joyride in his fighter: awkward but plausible. Some modern author was making a joke or trying to be sensationalist and wrote something like "Oswald Boelcke was reprimanded for taking a nurse up for flights in his aircraft, thus becoming the among the first people to join the Mile High Club". This isn't meant to be taken as an actual historical claim that he had sex with her. There is no evidence that he had sex with her. No one that knew him or her ever claimed that he did, just joking or speculating modern authors (if that; for all I know the book cited says nothing about sex in it, and that was just the way the person who made that entry interpreted it).
There are photos available of Boelcke and his young nurse. Her name was Blanka, and she was apparently a daughter from a nearby French household. In the pictures she is sitting in the plane with him, dressed in heavy flying gear. Sitting BEHIND him in the cockpit. Unless she gave him a reacharound through the thick layers of leather flying suit he was wearing, I don't see how it would even work. She certainly didn't sit in his lap and have actual intercourse with him. That would be basically impossible for all intents and purposes. Seems to me this comes to almost defamation of a dead mans name. He was a decent, respectable man who took a young girl up in an airplane and here are people turning it into something salacious. But of course unless I can find a book that specifically SAYS "he didn't have sex with her" I can't change anything, or it'd be "original research", right?
.svg){kind=small}
