A news item involving 2009 Indonesian Air Force L-100 crash was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 20 May 2009.

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Aviation: Accidents 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 articles This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion not met Supporting materials: criterion met This article is supported by the Aviation accident project. Indonesia Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indonesia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Indonesia and Indonesia-related topics 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.IndonesiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndonesiaTemplate:WikiProject IndonesiaIndonesia articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Death Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death 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.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Disaster management Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management 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.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article has been proposed for deletion. I only added this article because I believe that this crash is notable because of the number of deaths involved, but I could be wrong. I'll go start checking around to see if I can find any guidelines for notability of plane crashes anywhere. Caleb Jon ^talk 04:29, 20 May 2009 (UTC) reply

Ok, I just found this Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation/Notability#Accidents. Apparently crashes of military aircraft don't qualify as notable even if there are deaths involved (which I had previously thought). But it also says that if a military crash causes civilian deaths and occurs in a civilian area it can count as notable, so I think this crash still qualifies. Caleb Jon ^talk 04:51, 20 May 2009 (UTC) reply

Yep, I agree with you. Civilian deaths in a civilian area, so I think it is Hamish MacKellar | Only The Dead Have Seen The End Of War 09:16, 20 May 2009 (UTC) reply

I think that due to the fact that there were numerous deaths, as well as worldwide media coverage, the article should remain in-tact. People obviously care that the plane crashed. Also, the infobox used on the page was created specifically for aviation accidents. I say it should stay. Mnmazur ( talk) 22:34, 21 May 2009 (UTC) reply

one sentence says that there were 98 passengers another says 112.

Username 2 ( talk) 15:16, 20 May 2009 (UTC) reply

It also says that there were 109 passengers aboard, 97 deaths and 70 others taken to a local hospital? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.247.32.158 ( talk) 15:26, 20 May 2009 (UTC) reply

this is a pretty reliable source: http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20090520-0

Username 2 ( talk) 15:45, 20 May 2009 (UTC) reply

Sounds contradictory: "... at least 98 deaths, including 2 on the ground[2] at least five of which occurred on the ground ..." If there were 2 deaths on the ground, then how could at least five of those two have occurred on the ground? Art LaPella ( talk) 19:15, 20 May 2009 (UTC) reply

The 2/5 problem has been resolved by rewording. Art LaPella ( talk) 21:48, 20 May 2009 (UTC) reply

But where are the 70 other people coming from? From only 4 houses ? Can't believe it! Sounds highly suspicious to me... -- Azurfrog ( talk) 16:44, 11 November 2009 (UTC) reply

My guess would be that they took almost everybody they found to a local hospital no matter if they were injured or not. That could explain all the extra people going to a hospital. Caleb Jon ^talk 05:51, 12 November 2009 (UTC) reply

http://www.postcourier.com.pg/20090414/news01.htm

Is this relevant? When I opened the Wikinews article I assumed it was a belated report of this incident. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.234.131.220 ( talk • contribs) 05:36, 21 May 2009 (UTC) reply

The incident in the link is over a month old. It clearly is a separate incident that is in no way connected to this one. – Zntrip 05:40, 21 May 2009 (UTC) reply

The image file:2009 Indonesia C-130H Hercules crash.jpg is listed under a fair-use policy. However, this type of use is only allowed for critical analysis of the network or program from which the screenshot is rendered. This is not the case here. -- SVTCobra ( talk) 01:03, 22 May 2009 (UTC) reply

The image does qualify as fair use when illustrating the topic covered. It has been used by many western news networks, who also claim fair-use under American law. Mnmazur ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:46, 23 May 2009 (UTC). reply