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.
Keep: The article itself may need work, but this incident despite being non-fatal has already shown to have lasting significance, such as its use as a case study in a research project by the EASA in 2018
[1], an article by Flight Safety Australia also in 2018
[2], not to mention a Mayday/Air Crash Investigation episode this year.
ThatFlyingSquid (
talk)
19:09, 25 May 2021 (UTC)reply
Speedy keepA quick search shows multiple articles were written about it, and it even got a Mayday/Air Crash Investigation episode dedicated to it. That meets "historical significance" for me.
Uses x (
talk •
contribs)
22:39, 25 May 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete not a particularly noteworthy incident for a stand alone article, already covered in the Loganair article which is sufficient.
MilborneOne (
talk)
08:39, 30 May 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep. Major incident and near crash. The extensive AAIB report uncovered the significance of a Saab 2000 lacking an autopilot override. Incident was featured in the Mayday/Air Crash Investigation documentary series which counts as significant independent coverage. If the end result is, against my preference, to only cover the incident in the
Loganair article, redirecting is far preferable to outright deletion.
Sjakkalle(Check!)20:53, 30 May 2021 (UTC)reply
... that's not what WP:NOTNEWS is; this isn't trying to provide up-to date information, or first-hand reports. The accident happened all the way back in 2014 yet it's still notable enough to have been made the first episode in a new season of a major TV series, to have been the topic of a research project, on top of a fairly large amount of coverage at the time. Sustaining coverage isn't needed, either - see
Wikipedia:NOTTEMPORARY.
Uses x (
talk •
contribs)
02:31, 31 May 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete There is already an article relating to this aviation incident in draftspace which i am currently working on, there is no need for duplicate articles.
OGWFP (
talk)
21:02, 1 June 2021 (UTC)reply
OGWFP - Creating a draft article is not a rationale for requesting the deletion of an existing article. Honestly, there is no point in creating a draft version of the article when one already exists. If this article gets deleted, it's likely your draft version - if it is moved to the mainspace - will also be PROD or nominated for deletion, too. Just improve the existing article, please.
Missvain (
talk)
15:55, 2 June 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep Being featured on Mayday is not enough to merit an article's creation yes. However, the AAIB report of this major in flight upset resulting in a near crash put concern over a potential design defect of the Saab 2000. If this event actually resulted in a crash, the arguments for keeping the article up would have been essentially the same. The article would need more work on it.
Tntad (
talk)
15:45, 6 June 2021 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: I'm leaning towards keep, but open minded.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Missvain (
talk)
15:53, 2 June 2021 (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.