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.

The result was redirect to Dan-Air#Fatal accidents. If there is anything more to merge, editors can do so from the redirect's history. Sandstein 05:06, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

1966 Dan-Air Piper Apache crash

[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

NOT Notable per WP:AIRCRASH. Small aircraft crashes happen all the time ...William 15:57, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. ...William 15:59, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. -...William 15:59, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. -...William 15:59, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
History merge to Dan-Air#Fatal_accidents. The nominator's reasoning is sound and I agree with WP:AIRCRASH's recommendation that accidents of light aircraft involving deaths of non-notable individuals are not notable / not deserving of documentation in a separate article on Wikipedia. But as this does appear to be valid researched and cited encyclopedic content, there is no need for it to pass beyond the reach of non-admin users and should be incorporated into another article, even if immediately trimmed down for balance, so that it is at least accessible in the article history. --▸∮truthious ᛔandersnatch◂ 16:24, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Weak merge as above because it doesn't meet WP:AIRCRASH and there are no unusual circumstances. On the other hand, the plane was being operated by a major airline and I think that makes it more notable than the average light airplane crash. Dricherby (talk) 18:17, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You could make the case it does meet WP:AIRCRASH as it was "an airline aircraft" operating in line service at the time of the accident. However, given that it's a rather minor accident without too much lasting significance, Merge to Dan-Air#Fatal accidents seems the best way to go here. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 19:10, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - this was a crash involving a four-seat aircraft being used as a crew bus, at a time when Dan-Air was operating jets. If it was an actual bus being used on a road that crashed while transporting crew between bases, there would unquestionably be no article; I see no reason to document this event as a separate article and it's already mentioned in the Dan-Air article's accidents section with the same two sources as refs, so no need for a merge either. YSSYguy (talk) 23:42, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Whether or not Wikipedia would have an article about a bus crash is irrelevant to this discussion on whether an article about a plane crash should be deleted. Contrariwise, you could just as well say that if it had been a Boeing-747 instead of a Piper Apache, it would be a slam-dunk keep. But it wasn't a 747 and it wasn't a bus. Dricherby (talk) 08:33, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Dan-Air article. The operator of the service is not relevant, there is no indication of a lasting effect, nor notable passengers and although referenced I don't see the major independant coverage we expect. Leaving aside the AIBB report, there is the Flight summary of the report (a couple of paragraphs) and reference to a book on the airline (that was commissioned by the airline). GraemeLeggett (talk) 08:26, 26 May 2012 (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.