Even your own quote said tanks so it goes down to reading comprehension more than anything else.
I love people who begin rebutals before even reading more than half a complete sentence. No wonder people let ABs get in the air without listening to Boeing's concerns that their products aren't as safe or developed as theirs.
"The [insert name, model and manufacturer of specific product] tanks [<- plural, as we are talking about the product series and not a single tank of the product series] are located and designed to be protected in case of such problems. The
wing [<-singular, so they are refering to a single whole wing assembley] was affected, but absolutely not the [singular->] fuel tank,".
I'm not an AB fan or expert, but I'd be willing to bet there's more than one tank in a single wing assembly. We can also most likely, contrary to the statements from AB's public relations department, also find another tank or two along the aft fuesalage that were within LOS of the failed engine and in potential danger from a catastrophic uncontained engine failure.
Go grammar Nazi trolls that haven't finished grade school, unless you're waiting for hell to freeze over and for me to admit Airbuses are equal or superior to Boeings.
