Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pegasus Airlines Flight 751

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 merge to Concerns and controversies at the 2014 Winter Olympics and/or 2014 in aviation. ‑Scottywong | converse _ 05:37, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pegasus Airlines Flight 751

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

WP:NOTNEWS. Event is of no long term significance. ...William 20:30, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions....William 20:34, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions....William 20:37, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions....William 20:34, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions....William 20:34, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions....William 20:34, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) ~~Delete~~ - WP:NOTNEWS. This is a very minor incident. No one got injured, much less got killed. Events like this do not usually garner WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE or lead to a significant change in aviation procedures. Mz7 (talk) 20:35, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Changed !vote below. --Mz7 (talk) 00:21, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep for now - until we know the full story etc. I also think NOTNEWS does not apply.. if anything NOTNEWS is a hollow guideline as articles are based on news articles for references.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:41, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The point of NOTNEWS is to ensure that not every single incident which gets a brief spike in news coverage when they first come out is included in the encyclopedia. We want to include the events with historical value; this is not one of them. Mz7 (talk) 20:51, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this is ultimately too trivial for an article. Alternatively, merge and redirect to a concerns and controversies article if one exists. Reso lute 20:45, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for now - The story is still unfolding and there have been incidents where nobody was injured. Sam.gov (talk) 20:47, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete nothing appears to indicate it has any notability for a stand-alone article. MilborneOne (talk) 20:50, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: We should wait until the story unfolds before rushing to conclusions. It happened literally 2 hours ago, give it a break. It happened in concurrence with the Sochi Olympics and is particularly telling, as it underscores the security threats going on with that event. As the event unfolds and we get more information, we can expand the article. Connected to the Olympics, it will receive a ton of coverage in the coming days. Give the article a chance. KonveyorBelt 21:10, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose we could merge the article to Concerns and controversies at the 2014 Winter Olympics for now, and if the incident develops to the point of notability, then we can make the article independent again. Mz7 (talk) 21:21, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:24, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NOTNEWS. For those saying "wait", I point you to WP:NEWARTICLE, which says "being a new creation does not protect an article from being nominated for deletion. All articles have to comply with our inclusion policies from the moment they are created; if an article is not suitable for Wikipedia it will be deleted, regardless of how new it is." – Muboshgu (talk) 21:29, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:POTENTIAL. KonveyorBelt 21:30, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What "potential" does this have? I don't see any. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:31, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Per my !vote, it is connected to the 2014 olympics and will thus receive a lot of coverage and more details as time goes on. KonveyorBelt 21:33, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

But it's a one off news event barely associated with the Olympics. It'll get news coverage for the remainder of the current news cycle, and that'll be it. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:34, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There have been previous security scares related to Sochi like the suicide bombings in December, and security at those Olympics will receive coverage. The man wanted presumably to bomb Sochi or create a disturbance. KonveyorBelt 21:37, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Concerns and controversies at the 2014 Winter Olympics. Its unlikely this incident will have legs, but there is no reason not to cover it somewhere. It is already mentioned at my propsed merger location. --ThaddeusB (talk) 21:47, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete; come on... this is not a notable topics. The sources make it perfectly clear some drunk man with a stupid sense of humor shouted at a cockpit for 5 minutes before calming down (the fact that the airplane crew responded so wise indicates that this happens a lot...). The only significance of this event is that major newspapers seem not to be able to see the difference between important events and trivia.... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 21:57, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just because nobody got hurt doesn't mean it's not notable, if he'd killed someone, it would be no more or less notable. KonveyorBelt 22:05, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The drunk bastard had no dangerous items on him... How was he supposed to have killed somebody... by bad breath???? Everything points out that this incident was nothing more then a drunk shooting at a cockpit and that there was no danger to the aircraft passengers. (Sorry; but real life is just not Die Hard 3...)

PS Merging this article with Concerns and controversies at the 2014 Winter Olympics is OK by me; as long as it makes clear that there was never any danger to the aircraft passengers (nor to the Olympic Games). — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 01:18, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Anything but noteworthy. This will be forgotten by next week. Fails WP:AIRCRASH. FonEengIneeR7 ^talk 22:19, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Concerns and controversies at the 2014 Winter Olympics I strongly oppose deletion, how many flights do you know of where they scamble fighter jets to land an airplane due to a person? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 22:44, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to 2014 in aviation and Concerns and controversies at the 2014 Winter Olympics. Iff that guy had an actual bomb or other explosive device, then it may be kept, I think. Brandmeister^talk 23:14, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to 2014 in aviation and/or Concerns and controversies at the 2014 Winter Olympics. If the event becomes notable enough for its own article (seems unlikely, but...), it can be recreated. Novusuna ^talk 23:40, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Concerns and controversies at the 2014 Winter Olympics. As a one-line bit in that article, this is reasonable. As a stand-alone article? All I can say is Dear Lord, how somebody thought this was notable enough for its own article I'll never know. Suitable for inclusion in the concerns-and-controversies article, but has no notability at all for a standalone. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 00:14, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Concerns and controversies at the 2014 Winter Olympics - It makes sense to mention this at the controversies article. However, I maintain that this is not notable enough for its independent stand-alone article. Mz7 (talk) 00:21, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Look at the name of the merge article. Concerns and controversies at the 2014 Winter Olympics. It happened in the air over the Ukraine and Istanbul Turkey. Where is there an news article stating this was a concern in Sochi? To me it looks like WP:SYNTH....William 00:29, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"the Ukraine" is not the (English) common name of Ukraine since December 1991.... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 01:08, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

- - Because the would-be hijacker's "demanding to be flown to Sochi" makes the connection. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 00:36, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and Redirect to Concerns and controversies at the 2014 Winter Olympics-Per above. Not notable enough for its own article. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 07:26, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOTNEWS Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 10:18, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

obvious merge eper ThaddeusB and the rest as this can into the security concerns section with a sentence or .2.Lihaas (talk) 14:31, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per not-news.--Dmol (talk) 01:28, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Concerns and controversies at the 2014 Winter Olympics. Doesn't warrant its own article in my opinion. Palmtree5551 (talk) 03:33, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per the above. WP:EVENTS seems to side with the hijacking not getting its own article: it does not appear to have precipitated any changes in airline policy etc., and the event seems to have already stopped being reported on. It Is Me Here ^{t / c} 14:18, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per above, this flight has no significance outside of this event and, in particular, these Olympics Deville (Talk) 03:24, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOTNEWS. Drunks on planes are regular occurrences, rarely of any long- or mid-term significance, and as such is unlikely to be of value as a merge. Let alone its own article. Leondz (talk) 10:51, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I must jump aboard the "Merge to Concerns and controversies at the 2014 Winter Olympics" bandwagon. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 00:09, 16 February 2014 (UTC).[reply]
Merge into Concerns and controversies at the 2014 Winter Olympics per all above, but not too significantly, per Leondz. Ithinkicahn (talk) 03:27, 16 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.