Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2002 Africa One Antonov An-26 crash: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
: '''Keep''': Firstly notability stems from the fact that other people wrote about the incident (GNG). Secondly there was a change in operating procedure from the DRC government, and this crash was responsible for this occurring. That also gives notability to this incident. [[User:WhisperToMe|WhisperToMe]] ([[User talk:WhisperToMe|talk]]) 16:00, 18 April 2012 (UTC) |
: '''Keep''': Firstly notability stems from the fact that other people wrote about the incident (GNG). Secondly there was a change in operating procedure from the DRC government, and this crash was responsible for this occurring. That also gives notability to this incident. [[User:WhisperToMe|WhisperToMe]] ([[User talk:WhisperToMe|talk]]) 16:00, 18 April 2012 (UTC) |
||
*'''Keep''': Meets [[WP:AIRCRASH]] as the aircraft was written off, and there were changes introduced at the airport as a ''direct result'' of the accident. The article needs improvement, but that is not a reason to delete it. [[User:Mjroots|Mjroots]] ([[User talk:Mjroots|talk]]) 05:35, 19 April 2012 (UTC) |
*'''Keep''': Meets [[WP:AIRCRASH]] as the aircraft was written off, and there were changes introduced at the airport as a ''direct result'' of the accident. The article needs improvement, but that is not a reason to delete it. [[User:Mjroots|Mjroots]] ([[User talk:Mjroots|talk]]) 05:35, 19 April 2012 (UTC) |
||
*'''Keep''' A badly written article that still requires its own page nonetheless. A quick Google will find more references than the ones listed if that is the concern. |
*'''Keep''': A badly written article that still requires its own page nonetheless. A quick Google will find more references than the ones listed if that is the concern. --[[User:Sebread|Sebread]] ([[User talk:Sebread|talk]]) 17:36, 19 April 2012 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 17:36, 19 April 2012
- 2002 Africa One Antonov An-26 crash (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Not notable incident for independent article per WP:AIRCRASH ...William 15:10, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions....William 15:12, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions....William 15:12, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions....William 15:12, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
- Keep: Firstly notability stems from the fact that other people wrote about the incident (GNG). Secondly there was a change in operating procedure from the DRC government, and this crash was responsible for this occurring. That also gives notability to this incident. WhisperToMe (talk) 16:00, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
- Keep: Meets WP:AIRCRASH as the aircraft was written off, and there were changes introduced at the airport as a direct result of the accident. The article needs improvement, but that is not a reason to delete it. Mjroots (talk) 05:35, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
- Keep: A badly written article that still requires its own page nonetheless. A quick Google will find more references than the ones listed if that is the concern. --Sebread (talk) 17:36, 19 April 2012 (UTC)