The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Delete The trouble with running up the flag of "passes GNG" on incidents like this is that they will, in fact, get a spurt of news coverage immediately after the event - but then
nothing more beyond the initial surge of news-agency-release-based articles. There is nothing notable about this accident; it's tragic, but six months from now it'll be like the other thousands of cargo-plane crashes: a line of statistics, and nothing more. -
The BushrangerOne ping only05:16, 20 January 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep - where is it written that cargo aircraft are less notable than passenger aircraft? I see no evidence that accident rates are significantly higher for them per million flight hours. It's a hull loss of a large commercial aircraft. Accident reports often taake years before they are published, so claims of failing persistence are premature.
Mjroots (
talk)
10:19, 20 January 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete Firstly, all aircraft crashes generate an investigation report, so the (forthcoming) existence of a report does not of itself confer notability. Secondly and more importantly, as The Bushranger says, after a brief flurry of news reports there has been...nothing. Many aircraft crashes generate coverage years after the event - the Tenerife collision, the Air France Concorde, the Aloha Boeing 737, Sullenberger's ride into the Hudson, the DC-10 at Sioux City, Auburn Calloway's in-flight hammer attack on the Fedex crew, the Air France A320 at Habsheim, the de Havilland Comet crashes - I could go on; this is not one of those crashes. News reports do not automatically mean their subject will meet the GNG; if they did I could write an article on every single fatal car crash, aircraft crash and murder; and many of the accidental deaths; in Australia, secure in the knowledge such articles would not be deleted - because they all generate news reports "independent of the subject".
YSSYguy (
talk)
05:28, 21 January 2014 (UTC)reply
Why is it notable? As The Bushranger and I said above, news stories do not equate to passing the GNG. If that were the case, I could write
2014 Bondi Beach car crash about
this accident; after all I have seen the story on the internet (including coverage from Africa
[1][2] and the USA
[3]), heard about it on two different radio stations (one of which is national) and seen it reported on three different national television stations' news programs - and I am not in the city where it happened. I could also write an article about
this death, which is also receiving news coverage here in Australia.
YSSYguy (
talk)
22:29, 4 February 2014 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Delete The trouble with running up the flag of "passes GNG" on incidents like this is that they will, in fact, get a spurt of news coverage immediately after the event - but then
nothing more beyond the initial surge of news-agency-release-based articles. There is nothing notable about this accident; it's tragic, but six months from now it'll be like the other thousands of cargo-plane crashes: a line of statistics, and nothing more. -
The BushrangerOne ping only05:16, 20 January 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep - where is it written that cargo aircraft are less notable than passenger aircraft? I see no evidence that accident rates are significantly higher for them per million flight hours. It's a hull loss of a large commercial aircraft. Accident reports often taake years before they are published, so claims of failing persistence are premature.
Mjroots (
talk)
10:19, 20 January 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete Firstly, all aircraft crashes generate an investigation report, so the (forthcoming) existence of a report does not of itself confer notability. Secondly and more importantly, as The Bushranger says, after a brief flurry of news reports there has been...nothing. Many aircraft crashes generate coverage years after the event - the Tenerife collision, the Air France Concorde, the Aloha Boeing 737, Sullenberger's ride into the Hudson, the DC-10 at Sioux City, Auburn Calloway's in-flight hammer attack on the Fedex crew, the Air France A320 at Habsheim, the de Havilland Comet crashes - I could go on; this is not one of those crashes. News reports do not automatically mean their subject will meet the GNG; if they did I could write an article on every single fatal car crash, aircraft crash and murder; and many of the accidental deaths; in Australia, secure in the knowledge such articles would not be deleted - because they all generate news reports "independent of the subject".
YSSYguy (
talk)
05:28, 21 January 2014 (UTC)reply
Why is it notable? As The Bushranger and I said above, news stories do not equate to passing the GNG. If that were the case, I could write
2014 Bondi Beach car crash about
this accident; after all I have seen the story on the internet (including coverage from Africa
[1][2] and the USA
[3]), heard about it on two different radio stations (one of which is national) and seen it reported on three different national television stations' news programs - and I am not in the city where it happened. I could also write an article about
this death, which is also receiving news coverage here in Australia.
YSSYguy (
talk)
22:29, 4 February 2014 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.