Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/United Express Flight 2415

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 keep. (non-admin closure) Alpha_Quadrant ^(talk) 16:16, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

United Express Flight 2415 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Non-notable aircrash (see WP:AIRCRASH) and covered by aircraft type article. DexDor (talk) 19:10, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. At the risk of sounding flippiant: plane fell, everyone died, no long-lasting effects on the air transportation system. WP:NOTNEWSPAPER. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 19:23, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 19:41, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 20:29, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 20:29, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. It's difficult to imagine that there wasn't significant, independent coverage of an air crash involving a major American airline which killed everyone on board. The WP:AIRCRASH mentioned above clearly states that incidents resulting in airliner hull loss or loss of life are notable. Pburka (talk) 22:47, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Indeed, I'm absolutely positive this was covered enough to meet GNG. The fact that we can't find online references isn't a reason for it to be deleted. In this case, I think WP:BEFORE demands a search of relevant regional papers' archives (e.g. Spokane Herald, Seattle Times, etc.) before we can say it has "no" coverage. Jclemens (talk) 00:59, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The plane had a maximum takeoff weight of 15,332 lb. Per WP:AIRCRASH, planes are considered "light aircraft" if they have "maximum gross weights under 12,500 lb". This was a small commercial airliner and not a light aircraft. Six people were killed and the plane was destroyed. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:27, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Significant coverage in reliable sources about the crash of United Express Flight 2415 is readily available here and here and here and here. It was discussed months later here and here. It was discussed four years later in an article about a similar crash here (hidden behind a pay wall, but the description is there). Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:27, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Given the additional information found, I've struck my call for deletion - I'm still not sure it's worthy of inclusion, but there's certainly enough to not delete it, which is enough for me. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 06:52, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Per the sources that have been found. Lugnuts (talk) 06:57, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Definitely meets WP:GNG per the evidence kindly provided by Cullen³²⁸ — CharlieEchoTango — 07:10, 3 October 2011 (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.