Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carpatair Flight 1670

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 into Leonardo_da_Vinci–Fiumicino_Airport#Accidents_and_incidents, the actual article is yet feature in its source code, if the accident receives enough media coverage then someone should remove the redirect and expand the article. Non-admin closure by Eduemoni ^↑talk↓ 23:33, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Carpatair Flight 1670[edit]

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

Not notable aviation incident. Fails WP:Event and WP:NOTNEWS also applies....William 13:53, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions....William 13:55, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions....William 13:55, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions....William 13:55, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep An aviation accident with injuried people.User:Lucifero4
Keep per above. Was a serious accident in an occidental country.- EugεnS¡m¡on(14) ® 16:18, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Yes, an aircraft was severly damaged, possibly beyond repair. Per WP:AIRCRASH, it is therefore perfectly ok to mention this accident in the respective airline aritcle(s). But I don't think that this particular crash had a sufficient impact which would make a stand-alone article necessary. Flight 1670 is not notable per WP:EVENT. It was just a breaking news spike, with little chance of any lasting significance. The crash has only been covered over a very short period, and there has not been any kind of in-depth coverage and anlysis. --FoxyOrange (talk) 22:27, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to Leonardo da Vinci–Fiumicino Airport#Accidents and incidents. Worthy of note here (and/or in the airline article) but not nearly notable enough for a standalone article. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 22:16, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per FoxyOrange. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 01:42, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Merge info into the articles on the Aircraft type, Airline and Airport involved. Mjroots (talk) 12:22, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
CommentI started this AFD and I'm fine with a merge and redirect....William 14:27, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to Leonardo da Vinci–Fiumicino Airport#Accidents and incidents, not notable enough for a separate article, worthy of mention there. Cavarrone (talk) 11:02, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TBrandley ^{(what's up)} 02:48, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep An aviation accident with injuried people near an important airport. The aircraft sustained serious damage as well. (Gabinho^>:) 19:26, 13 February 2013 (UTC))[reply]
Keep. An aviation accident with 16 injuried people. Subsequent press coverage: During the night the wreckage was repainted to hide the Alitalia logo. [1] NickSt (talk) 13:36, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect per The Bushranger/Cavarrone. Nowhere near enough for a standalone article, and the facts that people were injured and that the crash was reported don't make this article-worthy. --Michig (talk) 08:37, 17 February 2013 (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.