Talk:2023 Caquetá Cessna Stationair crash

Merger proposal
I propose merging 2023 Colombia Amazon child rescue into this article. The content in 2023 Colombia Amazon child rescue can easily be explained in the context of this article, and a merger would not cause any article-size or weighting problems in this article. The crash preceded the rescue, and hence should be the primary article. WWGB (talk) 01:07, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Support per nom, this article is need of expansion and the other article can easily be merged into a search/aftermath section. RandomInfinity17 (talk - contributions) 02:22, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Support but now someone has created yet another article: 2023 Columbian plane crash. We now have 3 articles about the same event. Johndavies837 (talk) 05:15, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
 * ❌ the third article. WWGB (talk) 06:14, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Support I support to merge both articles. --Rudiwaka (talk) 10:05, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Support -- Wizzy&hellip; &#9742; 12:21, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Support, but the rescue is what makes it notable so that should be the primary article. 71.47.134.166 (talk) 13:26, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
 * But without the crash there would be no rescue. WWGB (talk) 13:37, 11 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Support, the survival and rescue operation is a consequence of the plane crash, and should be a development of that article. Darwin  Ahoy!  13:55, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Hello, I originally wrote the article at Simple English Wikipedia (which then got "translated" to the article about the survival & rescue operation here). If you look at the stories the media have, most are about the "miracle" of 4 children surviving, and being found/rescued after 40 days. There probably are fewer article abou a small plane crashing in the rainforest. So, if merged, the article should likely be the other one (about search&rescue), because that's what people will search for most.Eptalon (talk) 16:05, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Support The rescue happened due to the crash. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 18:55, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Support – It's true that without the survivor kids, this crash would have been unlikely to pass inclusion criteria for a Wikipedia article, but ultimately this is the story of a plane crash and the ensuing survival feat by four children. --Deeday-UK (talk) 19:52, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Support - Rescue is directly related to crash. Burgeoning Contracting   01:34, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Formulation
„Two of the occupants – the pilot and one adult – were killed on impact, and a passenger, the mother of the remaining four passengers, all children, died soon after the crash.“

This sentence is strange and hard to follow. At first I thought the children died. 86.120.208.159 (talk) 23:07, 13 June 2023 (UTC)


 * I think I've resolved that now. Iskandar323 (talk) 04:26, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Scope
I think it's time to discuss whether this page should be titled and framed in terms of the crash; I think it should be re-oriented a bit to what 90% of the global coverage has actually been about, which is "4 kids found alive after 40 days" or "4 Columbian children survive plane crash" - i.e.: almost all the titles are about the children being found or surviving. The detail that it was a Cessna 206 is not important in the title. A better descriptive title at this stage, based on the balance of coverage, would be something more like (2023) Columbia plane crash rescue. Iskandar323 (talk) 04:47, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I see that in the above merger discussion there was some talk of the survival/rescue being related to the crash and therefore the crash being the main story, to which I would say Thai cave rescue - now this was caused by a football coach leading kids on a caving expedition miles into a cave complex in rainy season, but the title of that page is still Thai cave rescue, not Thai caving clusterfuck. Iskandar323 (talk) 05:09, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
 * @Iskandar323, you are basically raising the same point as the merger discussion above, which was pretty much unanimous that this is essentially the story of a plane crash and of the ensuing survival feat. The current title is consistent with project conventions, see WP:AVTITLE. For the Thai cave rescue case, there would be no sensible title that could refer to the events immediately preceding the rescue, as your humorous example proves. --Deeday-UK (talk) 09:08, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Yep, but 90% of that discussion was had prematurely, when this page was little more than a stub. The plane crash itself is just the prologue of this story, and little to nothing is known of or said about it. Engine failure. Full stop. Iskandar323 (talk) 10:12, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
 * There is also currently needless precision. There is currently only one Columbia plane crash article on Wikipedia, so there is no need to specify "2023" or especially "Cessna 206" - hence none of the actual news headlines do so. Iskandar323 (talk) 10:14, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Again, see WP:AVTITLE. There is a convention here to use   . If applied strictly, the title should be 2023 Avianline Cessna 206 crash. BTW, the country is Colombia, not Columbia. WWGB (talk) 11:11, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Well ok, but WP:AVINAME is just an essay; WP:NAME is policy, and this page title is not recognizable, natural or concise, or even arguably precise, since it is too narrow a scope. And that's before we get started on WP:COMMONNAME, which leans heavily in favour of Columbia plane crash or Amazon plane crash as in the merged title. Iskandar323 (talk) 11:20, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
 * No-one here has mentioned AVINAME except you. The relevant link is WP:AVTITLE which is on the main page of the WikiProject Aviation/Aviation accident task force. And again, the country is COLOMBIA, not "Columbia". WWGB (talk) 11:37, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
 * WP:AVTITLE links back to WP:AVINAME, but I guess they're different. It's also irrelevant. Ok, so it's a WikiProject preference/suggestion versus WP:NAME. The fundamental point stands. Iskandar323 (talk) 11:42, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
 * This is what people are searching for (it's not the "Cessna 206 crash"). Iskandar323 (talk) 11:46, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
 * More sustained coverage framing the event from the obviously more notable perspective of the dramatic nature of the survival/rescue (not crash). Iskandar323 (talk) 13:39, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

Custody battle
Does the custody battle section really belong in an article like this? I get that most of the article is about the search and rescue but by adding the custody section, this article is straying away from what it's supposed to be, an aviation accident section. The search and rescue should be part of the article but the custody battle is a whole different topic that's not related whatsoever to aviation. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 15:00, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I think that is a consequence of the crash, and see no harm in its inclusion. WWGB (talk) 01:11, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Agree that the custody battle has a place in the article, as part of the aftermath of the accident, and I've just renamed the section as such. -- Deeday-UK (talk) 13:20, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I agree with that alternative. I didn't want to delete entirely that section I just wasn't sure whether it belonged in the article or not. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 14:47, 16 February 2024 (UTC)