Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comair Flight 5054

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. consensus is delete. That another plane of the same model crashed in a notabler incident does not make this incident notable. DGG ( talk ) 02:43, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comair Flight 5054

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

Doesn't meet WP:Aircrash criteria. Not sure it is even worthy of a mention in airport or aircraft article. William 12:20, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. -William 12:22, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. -William 12:22, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. -William 12:22, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. - per nom. The suggested connection to the incident with N265CA is too weak to support a merge to the aircraft article. There is also no explicit indication that the airline stopped using this aircraft because of the incident (a sequence of events does not establish causation). -- Donald Albury 13:02, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete' doesnt appear to be notable for a stand alone article or any mention in airport or aircraft articles. MilborneOne (talk) 13:34, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - utterly fails all of the relevant notability guidelines. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 15:01, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Doesn't meet notability as per WP:AIRLINE guidelines, i.e. no hull-loss, no changes in procedures, and no dead.--Jetstreamer (talk) 16:52, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Possibly delete as a stand alone incident, but in the context of a fatal crash occurring to another aircraft in similar circumstances, might it be better to see if more information can be added? This article has been in Wikpedia for over 5 years and the statistics show an average of 300-400 views per month since 2007, so clearly some people find it interesting! BritAirman (talk) 09:38, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- WP:ITSINTERESTING is not a valid argument to keep. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 11:15, 4 January 2012 (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.