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 speedy keep. A previous AfD was closed just eight days ago and this nomination introduces no new arguments, sources, or facts that were not presented then. SpinningSpark 12:12, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Xiamen Airlines Flight 8667

[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

This appears to be an ordinary runway excursion without hull loss - the only reported damage to the aircraft was the detached engine from the left wing, i.e. less severe than, for example, Utair Flight 579 (zero fatalities aside). Does not appear to meet WP:EVENT as such. Brandmeister^talk 10:37, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:10, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:10, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:10, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy procedural close. We just talked about this last month. Howard the Duck (talk) 11:20, 9 September 2018 (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.