Talk:2016 Magdalen Islands Mitsubishi MU-2 crash

Requested move 14 April 2016

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: No consensus to move – and other suggestions such as merge may be worth further consideration. Dicklyon (talk) 15:37, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

2016 Aero Teknic MU-2 crash → 2016 Îles-de-la-Madeleine crash? – I don't think "Aero Teknic" and "MU-2" is really evocative of the incident. A simple perusal of the article references show that in the press, we refer to it as the Îles-de-la-Madeleine crash. (2016 Magdalen Islands crash would also be acceptable). Also see Google news results and. The article is also named for the location on fr.wiki. Wikiproject Aviation crashes says "'For articles on air accidents without a flight number, the title should be in the format < > < > < > < > or if this is not possible, < > < > < >. [...] Some flexibility can be exercised. [...] Exceptions: if the event has acquired a popular name, that name should be used.'" Further, WP:CRITERIA: "Recognizability – The title is a name or description of the subject that someone familiar with, although not necessarily an expert in, the subject area will recognize." I would argue "Aero Teknic" is not really useful as an airline designation (the fr article calls it an aviation school) nor recognizable. For all those reasons we should move the article to be designated by the place. Bert Macklin (talk) 21:49, 14 April 2016 (UTC) --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 00:06, 23 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment it should use English, so would be "Magdalen Islands", but Jean Lapierre aircrash or Death of Jean Lapierre might be better, since that is how it is recognized. -- 70.51.45.100 (talk) 04:57, 15 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Oppose - The style guide for article titles contains an exception for subjects where there is a standard naming convention, see Article titles The standard naming convention for aviation crashes/incidents which do not involve flight numbers (eg. Air France Flight 447) is to use the format "DATE LOCATION AIRLINE AIRCRAFT TYPE crash" (see WP:AVINAME). In this case, because there is no airline, the appropriate format is "2016 Magdalen Islands Mitsubishi MU-2 crash", unless the French name for the island is more connected to this subject, in which case it could be moved to "2016 Îles-de-la-Madeleine Mitsubishi MU-2 crash". The fact that a notable person was among the deaths does not mean that the article title should be changed, eg. 1999 South Dakota Learjet crash (death of Payne Stewart), 2010 Polish Air Force Tu-154 crash (death of Polish president Lech Kaczyński), 1957 Cebu Douglas C-47 crash (death of Philippines President Ramon Magsaysay). However, I have found a couple exceptions: Death of Aaliyah and Assassination of Juvénal Habyarimana and Cyprien Ntaryamira. While there are some cases where there is a common name for a crash (generally, these are events before Wikipedia was created), I think it is preferable to follow the common naming standard for aviation crashes, rather than "death of [famous person]", and I don't think there is any compelling reason to exclude the aircraft model from this article title. AHeneen (talk) 00:02, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: Redirects are cheap. Redirects from 2016 Îles-de-la-Madeleine crash, 2016 Magdalen Islands crash, & Death of Jean Lapierre would be appropriate. AHeneen (talk) 00:06, 16 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Merge the article into Jean Lapierre. It's only seven sentences long the the notability of the crash derives solely from the plane's most notable occupant (see also WP:NOTNEWS).  —  AjaxSmack   02:23, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree with the Merge suggestion, there is nothing here than warrants coverage outside the Jean Lapierre article, the reason for interest in the crash is the man himself. If encyclopaedic information about the crash increases significantly, a content fork can always be done later. YSSYguy (talk) 02:34, 17 April 2016 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Merged?
Why was this article merged? This is a very notable incident that deserves an article. When 7 people die in a plane crash, regardless of the place, an article is frequently made. When the plane crash occurs somewhere where plane crashes rarely occur, such as Canada, it also frequently gets an article. When a plane crash kills a former Canadian federal minister and MP, and radio host, that also adds on to the notability. I don't understand why this major incident was removed? There are many articles on aviation accidents that are a lot less notable than this one. An article this notable needs a article, and I would like to revert the merging.

Note: The original article appears to not have had much information, so was that the reason of the merging? I would have gladly improved the article, and I will if the merging is reverted. Beejsterb (talk) 23:34, 12 June 2016 (UTC)


 * If there are no objections, I will soon revert the merge and add more information to the article, making it a lot larger than it previously was. Beejsterb (talk) 03:11, 18 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Article has been reverted as per WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV Beejsterb (talk) 02:18, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
 * See Talk:Jean Lapierre. At any rate, you have misunderstood what constitutes notability, apart from anything else it has nothing to do with "amount of article content". YSSYguy (talk) 06:21, 29 June 2016 (UTC)


 * It seems most people there wanted the article merged since it did not have much content. Now that information on the investigation has been released, I created a new article since it would be too much to add to the merged article. This is not unnecessary detail as all aviation incidents on Wikipedia have a section on the investigation. The source for the investigation is also very reliable as it is the website of the Transportation Safety Board of Canada, an agency of the Government of Canada. I will admit that the forum source is not reliable, and I should not have included it. Anyways, this is a very notable incident with a large amount of relevant information on it that deserves its own article. The investigation is still ongoing and I expect that even more necessary information will be added in the future. Beejsterb (talk) 21:13, 29 June 2016 (UTC)