Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1987 La Junta B-1 crash

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 delete. The community consensus seems to be to delete articles on events of this type DGG ( talk ) 02:57, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

1987 La Junta B-1 crash[edit]

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

Not notable military accident. Tragic but with noone notable involved it Fails WP:AIRCRASH. ...William 02:32, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. ...William 02:35, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Colorado-related deletion discussions. ...William 02:35, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. -...William 02:35, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. ...William 02:35, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Tragic but WP:RUNOFTHEMILL military birdstrike accident. Worth a sentence in the B-1's article, perhaps, but nothing more. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 02:42, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete; non-notable crash. I disagree slightly with the Bushranger — a note at Otero County, Colorado would be helpful as well as a sentence in the article about the aircraft model. Nyttend (talk) 03:01, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- That would be logical too, yeah. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 16:57, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - any information can go into the aircraft and 338th Bombardment Squadron articles. Buckshot06 (talk) 03:42, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep, but only because these aircrash articles seem to have very random outcomes at AfD. We recently kept a commercial airliner incident involving a birdstrike where nobody died, unlike here... so I am !voting keep only because there should be more consistency. I think the AIRCRASH standard is too wide as it is. Shadowjams (talk) 09:59, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- The key words there being "commercial" and "airliner". - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 16:57, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete non-notable military training accident, sad but still far too common to be of any note. MilborneOne (talk) 10:12, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Tragic but run of the mill. A note could be placed at the squadron, the place or the aircraft's pages but not enough for an article by itself. -- Alexf^(talk) 13:13, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not notable. Intothatdarkness (talk) 13:44, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Arguably, there is notability in a $100,000,000 B-1 bomber, once promoted as America's super weapon that would penetrate the Soviet Union's defenses, being brought down by a mere flock of birds, but the article's author seems to have missed the significance. No great loss if a flock of deletes brings this one down. Mandsford 19:37, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - A non-notable military aircraft crash, with few redeeming features, except, perhaps that there were more crew on-board than ejection seats.Petebutt (talk) 17:09, 7 June 2012 (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.