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 Blue Wing Airlines. Spartaz ^Humbug! 18:38, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2010 Blue Wing Airlines Antonov An-28 crash[edit]

2010 Blue Wing Airlines Antonov An-28 crash (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)

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

Per WP:NOTNEWS. Its a routine news report-type article. Accidents occur many times, but the fact they occurred does not make them notable. —Mikemoral♪♫ 02:27, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - I don't see sufficient notability outside of routine news reports. Tragedy, but not notable in the WP:N sense. Shadowjams (talk) 09:01, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as Wikipedia is not a place for news. There is no evidence of lasting impact. Armbrust ^Talk _Contribs 13:12, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Keep or Redirect to Blue Wing Airlines. I think that there is plenty of evidence of lasting impact, more so than we would see in most airline crashes: [1] "Suriname's US Embassy bans staff from using local Blue Wing Airlines due to safety concerns" and "EU Adds Suriname's Blue Wing To List Of Banned Airlines". I'll offer a wishy-washy suggestion of a redirect, since I think that this would be the tragedy that is most likely to put this infamously unsafe carrier out of business. Mandsford 15:01, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep An airliner was written off and eight lives were lost. That should be sufficient to establish notability. Mjroots (talk) 18:39, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Insignificant aircrash, the amount of blacklisted airlines out there is huge, whole countries are even blacklisted, and listing/delisting is not uncommon. Embassies simply giving good advice is also not significant. This happened three months ago and is still a classic news article which should never have been created in the first place without even considering these sorts of aspects of historical note, rather than just competing with wikinews. It's high time better standards were enforced at source, such as here and here. MickMacNee (talk) 19:58, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Textbook WP:NOTNEWS. Light aircraft, small number of fatalities, nothing exceptionally notable about it that suggests it will be remembered in a month or a year. The very fact that there are two other incidents very similar to this at AfD currently in itself suggests that they are not particularly uncommon. This kind of thing may have been notable 10 years ago, but air travel has become much more common across the world, thus, it's inevitable that, with more planes in the sky, more will fall out of it. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:54, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment "Light aircraft" refers to General Aviation, the AN-28 is an airliner. Mjroots (talk) 10:37, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Next time submit "Wikipedia is not a news source"'s articles to Wikinews, a sister project specially designed for news! Diego Grez (talk) 23:01, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per established practice, reliable sources^[2] and this proposed guideline: Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation/Notability If unhappy with the guideline, I suggest proposing its change or deletion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aviation/Notability --213.167.156.218 (talk) 01:57, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note. This IP has made no other edits to the project except to copy and paste this same vote across three Afds of wildly different crashes

• Redirect to Blue Wing Airlines. This one doesn't have enough coverage to meet WP:EVENT as far as I can see, and most of the content is at the airline page already. Alzarian16 (talk) 13:02, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:49, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete it Sad but not enough death and airplanes that crash and kill eight people are common. 207.81.170.99 (talk) 06:08, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, largely per Mjroots and IP 213..., combination of eight dead, hull loss, commercial aviation, and many reports on it equals notability. C628 (talk) 00:52, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Notability is not a combo game. Eight dead is not automatically notable. Hull losses are not automatically notable. Commercial aviation crashes are not automatically notable. Many reports do not confer automatically notability. You cannot simply add a bunch of things that do not confer notability up to claim it equals notability. And not only is the IP currently blocked, his rationale is quite obviously invalid as he posted it without any consideration across three wildly different Afd's. MickMacNee (talk) 23:32, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Per Mjroots. - Ret.Prof (talk) 02:13, 2 September 2010 (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.