Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Merpati Nusantara Airlines Flight 868

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. Closing early, per WP:SNOW (non-admin closure) Monty ₈₄₅ 02:49, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merpati Nusantara Airlines Flight 868

WP:RECENTISM, WP:NOTNEWS. Yet another one... Diego Grez (talk) 12:41, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Airplane crash in poor country . . . who gives a shit? Nutmegger (talk) 13:40, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Act like a grownup.—S Marshall T/C 14:52, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, plane crash with fatalities.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kslotte (talk • contribs)

Fatalities =! Notability Diego Grez (talk) 14:50, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I agree with Kslotte that this appears to pass both the WP:GNG and WP:AIRCRASH.—S Marshall T/C 14:52, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - This starts to get annoying when every-time a airliner crashes, there is an afd template on the article an hour later. This is a fatal aircrash, that definitly meets WP:N.-Marcusmax(speak) 15:50, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Scheduled airliner flight. Crash. Fatalities => Keep (Gabinho^>:) 16:06, 7 May 2011 (UTC))[reply]
Keep, worst accident ever for this type of aircraft. Widespread news coverage, enough to pass GNG. C628 (talk) 16:24, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Easily meets WP:GNG. Lugnuts (talk) 16:25, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:AIRCRASH- William 16:28, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Snow keep I give a shit. Marcus Qwertyus 16:46, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Airliner accident with fatalities with Indonesia major domestic airline. This is the frist time a Xian MA60 has had a major loss with fatalities. Lee Bytheway (talk) 18:04, 7 May 2011
Snowball keep - Whilst a number of fatalities doesn't guarantee notability, the high number of fatalities for the size of the aircraft adds considerable weight to the case for notabilty. Passes WP:AIRCRASH with ease. Mjroots (talk) 17:28, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - While you are at it, why don't you nominate Osama bin Laden's page as well? Michael5046 (talk) 18:15, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Deadliest crash of the type is just about a credible claim. Not that it's a particularly large fleet even. Although I see the article doesn't even assert that claim to notability yet. I suppose we are just taking this on trust. AIRCRASH is an essay, and even if it wasn't, it most certainly does not mandate creating a separate entry on Wikipedia for every fatal airliner crash that makes the news. And neither does the GNG, which is as always, just a presumption of notability. This is an encyclopoedia, not a database or a post-2006 news archive, and this is the exact class of article which is expected to have some credible claim to lasting significance or historical relevance beyond 'it happened'. MickMacNee (talk) 18:32, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep First deadly accident on a commercial flight of the type and thus will prove to be of historical interest... L.tak (talk) 20:33, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
KeepSummary of information all in one place will help those searching for Merpati and MA60 information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.253.236.0 (talk) 21:20, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per MMN--Wikireader41 (talk) 21:34, 7 May 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.