Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2010 Romanian Air Force Antonov An-2 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 consensus is that this meets WP:NOTNEWS -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 17:03, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2010 Romanian Air Force Antonov An-2 crash[edit]

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

WP:NOTNEWS. A tragic accident, but not one with any lasting notability. Little to no ongoing coverage. A mere few weeks later and it seems to have been forgotten by the media. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:19, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:54, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:54, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - the An-2 is not a small aircraft, ~~having a wingspan larger than the Douglas DC-3~~. Twelve dead is a significant number which adds weight to the notablilty. The accident happened in Romania, which means that coverage in en-sources is likely to be sparse and it won't be very widely reported in Romania either. This does not detract from the notability of the event though. Mjroots (talk) 06:22, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The accident resulted in 12 fatalities, 2 people injured and a loss of the aircraft. Hard to see why this accident isn't a notable event. C1010 (talk) 06:55, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep - notability and media coverage really exist - Eugen Simion 14 (talk) 06:59, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This crash actually got a paragraph in at least one Australian capital-city newspaper, however as HJ Mitchell points out it falls foul of WP:NOTNEWS. It does not meet the criteria set out for military aircraft crashes in WP:AIRCRASH either. The An-2 seats 12 (i.e. similar seating capacity to a King Air 200) versus a DC-3's 32 and does not have a larger wingspan than a DC-3, unless you add the spans of the two wings together (which you wouldn't do as a method of comparing aircraft types). YSSYguy (talk) 07:49, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I've struck my incorrect comment re wingspan. Mjroots (talk) 08:09, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete or redirect to an article on the airplane model, where this crash is already included.. Single engine biplane crash with 12 fatalities. If 12 people are killed in a highway smashup, in a disease outbreak or in a tenement fire, or in the sinking of a small boat in wartime, it would not seem to require enshrinement forever in encyclopedias. Per Wikipedia is not a directory, Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information and in particular WP:NOTNEWS. Edison (talk) 16:55, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No lasting notability, we're not wikinews. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 15:24, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete per Edison's good comment on the matter. Ryan Norton 11:45, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, standard WP:NOTNEWS case. Stifle (talk) 15:36, 5 August 2010 (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.