Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/United Nations Flight 544

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. (non-admin closure) LlamaAl (talk) 00:02, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

United Nations Flight 544[edit]

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

Fails WP:AIRCRASH. Shootdowns of aircraft during a conflict, accidental or not, aren't notable unless someone themselves notable is involved. Which clearly isn't the case here....William 22:12, 12 February 2013 (UTC0

This passes the cited guidelines: This was a civilian aircraft owned by a private corporation on an humanitarian (i.e. non-military) mission. All casualties were civilians. No weapons of war or other implements of hostility, including espionage, have been reported on the aircraft. At over 7,000 kgs empty, the Mil Mi-8 does not meet "light aircraft" status either. If you want to cite (informal) WikiProject guidelines, at least be precise.

Anyhow, this event is not primarily notable from an aviation perspective, but from an international relations one. It is causing significant political tension between Russia, S. Sudan and UNMIS. Non-notability by aviation standards does not make the political event non-notable. If you object to the flight-number based title or infobox and kick it out of your WikiProject, please suggest a useable alternative. Keitsist (talk) 23:10, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. ...William 22:12, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. ...William 22:12, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. ...William 22:12, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Seems to meet WP:GNG, with significant news coverage of the resulting international affair. — daranz [ t ] 23:05, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, although consider renaming to Shootdown of UN Flight 544 and making the article more clearly about the whole affair. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 00:31, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming is a fantastic idea. Is "shootdown" a noun though? Would "crash", "downing," "shooting" or something similar work? Is there an aviation equivalent of "sinking"??Keitsist (talk) 01:34, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think the aviation term would be Downing of UN Flight 544. But a look at Category:Airliner shootdown incidents suggests the term "shootdown" would also be acceptable. The word "incident" afterward also seems to have been commonly used. I don't think there is a distinction made (in this regard) between planes and helicopters, but I am happy to stand corrected. Stalwart111 07:12, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - though I support the idea of amending the name to better reflect the event. Stalwart111 07:12, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - notable enough, rename is probably also good idea.--Staberinde (talk) 19:00, 13 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.