Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Skydive Örebro DHC-2 Turbo Beaver 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. RL0919 (talk) 03:20, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Skydive Örebro DHC-2 Turbo Beaver crash

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

As stated by Ahunt here, this light aircraft crash had no lasting effects and none of the fatalities are notable people. It fails both WP:AIRCRASH and WP:EVENT. ZLEA _T\^C 02:53, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. ZLEA _T\^C 02:53, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:AIRCRASH. While the incident fatality is high, 8 out 9, as the incident only involves light aircraft it is non-prominent. No major change on procedures, thus no notability from that end. Tragic incident, but non-notable. SunDawn talk 08:19, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:01, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:01, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per WP:EVENT and WP:RUNOFTHEMILL. Tragic as the deaths in these cases are, fatal light aircraft crashes are very common, as thousands occur each year. As in most cases, this one has no indication that there will be any lasting effects, beyond the deaths of those involved: no airworthiness directives, no changes in ATC procedures, or anything else, plus no notable people involved. Wikipedia continues to have articles created on non-notable aircraft accidents while ignoring equivalent accidents involving buses, trains, automobiles, bicycles, etc, due solely the the mainstream press sensationalizing aircraft crashes while ignoring most other transportation accidents. We also treat these accidents very unevenly: there have been more than 313 Beaver crashes and we have articles on almost none of them (because they are non-notable). I am sure editors will try to argue that this accident is so unique because eight people died, but why should this accident be covered, while hundreds of other similar ones are ignored, including a very similar one again yet again this past week in which six people died? And please don't argue that we need an article on that accident, as it also fails the same criteria.- Ahunt (talk) 12:28, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Notification of the existence of this AfD has been made at WikiProject Aviation and WikiProject Aircraft, within whose scope this article falls. - Ahunt (talk) 12:35, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 10:07, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: as per another incident that has been deleted recently, this one is similar. Sadly a few people died, but this is a minor accident of a small plane: it doesn't need a standalone page.--Paolo9999 (talk) 12:21, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Ahunt - Whilst it's sad there's been fatalities here however sadly no one involved was notable and as Ahunt states these sorts of crashes tend to happen every year. (I don't mean this to sound heartless but) Unless it's a terrible accident which results in court hearings or changes in law or even a unique accident in some way then I don't really see a need for an article here. –Davey2010^Talk 14:27, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Ahunt. Tragic but not notable....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 15:15, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – I long for some consistency here on WP. We covered skydiver plane crashes more than once in the past:

They, and the nominated article, are all very similar for category of aircraft involved, type of flight, number of fatalities etc. They should either all go or all stay, so that the reader knows what to expect. --Deeday-UK (talk) 08:41, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deeday-UK A majority of skydiving crashes are not notable per WP:AIRCRASH. Therefore, three of the accidents you listed probably are not notable enough for their own articles. However, 2010 Fox Glacier FU-24 crash states that "The final report was released in May 2012. It recommended tightened regulation of centre-of-gravity calculations, change of use modifications and parachute pilot monitoring." I'm not sure if you can call that a "significant change to the aircraft design or aviation operations", but it's probably worth discussing. - ZLEA _T\^C 15:22, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:ZLEA is right, unless these resulted in any lasting effects, like that one may have, then WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS applies and they should all be nominated for deletion on the same basis. I should add that I would be in favour of keeping them all, as long as we treated all transportation accidents equally and have articles on all car, bus, train, boating, bike, etc, accidents. - Ahunt (talk) 16:23, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@ZLEA: The bit you quote above was totally unreferenced (It can go back in if referenced with a reliable source) and I removed it as such. I also nominated the article for deletion. The AFD can be found here....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 17:11, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WilliamJE I actually quoted the part directly above the content you removed. The content I quoted is sourced directly from the final report. It may not be a secondary source, but the quoted text is by no means unreferenced. - ZLEA _T\^C 18:54, 13 August 2021 (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.