Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Air France Flight 689

Air France Flight 689

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

A non-notable technical failure which is not even notable for a mention on the airline or aircraft articles never mind a stand-alone article. Unspecified technical failure causes aircraft to divert, one of many of such that occur daily so although it claims passengers were inconvenienced a two-hour delay is not significant. MilborneOne (talk) 22:36, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:21, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:21, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Yeah, I'm not seeing anything significant here, let alone "notable" (no press reports). Definitely doesn't seem a worthy enough event for a full Wikipedia article, even a stub. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:22, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
????????????Delete Is the author on drugs??--Petebutt (talk) 02:28, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Petebutt, please assume good faith on behalf of the article's creator. Comments like this one can be seen as an WP:ADHOMINEM attack. Make comments on the content, not the editor. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:58, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not a comment, but a legitimate (albeit, facetious) question.--Petebutt (talk) 13:29, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NOT: Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. I mean, if we had an article about every incident in the world where an aircraft, ship, train or coach was held up for two hours, Wikipedia would become rather large and not very interesting: Noyster (talk), 08:27, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Such incidents occur very often, almost every day. Definitely not worthy of having its own article. Should be deleted.