User:Dfadden/XfD log

This is a log of all deletion discussion nominations made by this user using Twinkle's XfD module.

If you no longer wish to keep this log, you can turn it off using the preferences panel, and nominate this page for speedy deletion under CSD U1.

May 2024

1. Rowen's Arcade: nominated at AfD; notified BugMenn (talk · contribs) 12:55, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
   • Reason: Small, local shopping arcade with no obvious notability. Appears to be WP:MILL, based mostly original research and the few sources provided are either deadlinks, primary sources (Web pages of tenants), real estate listings or limited to very local media coverage. Has been previously tagged for notability, but tagging was reverted/removed without discussion on talk page or obvious improvement.
2. United Airlines Flight 1175: nominated at AfD; notified AyaanLamar (talk · contribs) 05:12, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
   • Reason: Fails WP:EVENT and WP:LASTING.
     I note the previous AfDs and the contentious debate surrounding this article. It was previously deleted at an AfD in 2018, then restored by a deletion review in 2021. It survived a second AfD on the basis of continuing coverage and publication of new information which (allegedly) demonstrated the significance and lasting impact of this incident. This new information was almost entirely related to:
     * The release of the NTSB report in late 2020; and
     * Engine failures on United Airlines Flight 328 and Japan Airlines 904, involving the same type of aircraft and engine.
     Any time that an incident resulted in a news spike, it is likely that the release of the accident report may receive at least some coverage in secondary sources, but more often than not, this just means that the official investigation has concluded. Notability would be inherited from the content of that report, rather than its existence. In this case, it appears the report recommended changing routine inspection intervals for operators of PW4000 engines. This is a fairly predictable outcome that impacts a specific group of operators - more notable would be an unexpected finding that leads to sweeping changes to regulations across the industry as a whole, but even then it would be more appropriate to cover this in Pratt & Whitney PW4000 article. The article itself quotes the NTSB as saying they had not confirmed a link to the other incidents mentioned above that generated the media spike.
     Of the references cited that have been published from 2020 onwards, there is little to indicate significant WP:LASTING coverage of this incident. Most either provide DEPTHtrivial]] mentions of United 1175 while discussing other incidents, are WP:SENSATIONAL, or do not demonstrate WP:PERSISTANCE in the form of detailed case studies, rather they are rehashing what was already reported on in 2018.
     Other additions to the article in a bid to demonstrate notability have been irrelevant or unencyclopedic - including several paragraphs detailing the history Boeing 777 fatal accidents and hull-losses, an individual's filing of a lawsuit for emotional distress or timelines of the crew performing routine procedures such as initiating fuel crossfeeds and lowering the landing gear. I just removed a sentance and reference from 2018 that said United were planning to offer passengers on flight 1175 refunds! Dfadden (talk) 05:12, 18 May 2024 (UTC)