Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1944 Camisette Air Crash


 * 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   merge to List of accidents and incidents involving military aircraft (1940–1944). Stifle (talk) 10:20, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

1944 Camisette Air Crash

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Not notable as this is an article on a wartime Dakota crash in France with a loss of 23 persons, sad but hardly unusual in wartime and I cant see anything unusual in what are hundreds of similar operational wartime accidents MilborneOne (talk) 20:07, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - Fails WP:AIRCRASH, not a notable accident. There were hundreds of thousands of aircraft crashes during WWII, nothing makes this one stand out as worth a separate article. - Ahunt (talk) 20:23, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - Notable incidents don't suddenly become non-notable because they took place in war time. As a matter of fact, wartime aviation disasters like this are frequently considered more historic due to their wartime relevance.  Here were are in in 2012, over 65 years after the incident, are we are talking about it, an obvious indication of longevity of encyclopedic interest. --Oakshade (talk) 21:15, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete I vehemently oppose this circular claim of notability. What a horrible line of reasoning. - Frankie1969 (talk) 02:34, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment When this editor uses that type of argument, you have to wonder if his AFD votes should be taken seriousuly at all.- William 16:24, 23 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete - Does not meet notability standard. Sumanch (talk) 22:40, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:08, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:08, 23 January 2012 (UTC)


 * 'Delete' per nom. This should be mentioned in the Mijanès article, and is, but a stand-alone is unnecessary as it wasn't a notable crash. Nick-D (talk) 07:05, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge relevant info into List of accidents and incidents involving military aircraft (1940–1944). No need to retain redirect. Mjroots (talk) 09:40, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominator. If someone notable had died in the crash, the article could stay.- William 15:29, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - it is notable, it is part of WWII history, it is well researched and referenced. There is an entire exhibition in Usson dedicated to this incident. Where on earth did this come from?? Wikidwitch (talk) 18:21, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment- (I'll copy to talk page if kept and not addressed) 23 on board, but injuries & fatalities add to 25 (Fatalities should be 17, unless ground death occured, since one is explained as injured, died later). Dru of Id (talk) 21:51, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge & Redirect; although the content is well referenced, and therefore meets WP:VER, the event itself does not appear to meet WP:EFFECT. That being said due to the fact that the subject of the article meets WP:INDEPTH, it can also be argued that it meets WP:GNG. Due to these two things I am suggesting that the article be redirected, as suggested by Mjroots, but a redirect be left to the appropriate subsection. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:07, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - Tragic but WP:RUNOFTHEMILL wartime accident. WP:NOTMEMORIAL may also apply. Lots of aircraft crash in wartime, unfortunatly; this was just another one of them. While information on the accident should be in the mentioned list, it should be written from scratch, as there is no need to retain a redirect here. - The Bushranger One ping only 20:32, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge & Redirect to List of accidents and incidents involving military aircraft (1940–1944). This was not a war related accident but weather related. Even now, nearly 70 years later, weather-related plane crashes are still not considered run-of-the-mill. -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 20:57, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Those are weather-related airline crashes. That a military transport crashed, especially in the 1940s, is run-of-the-mill. - The Bushranger One ping only 22:23, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, I see no references to back up the lasting impact claim, the links are blog and specialized war information sites that store a lot of wartime information without regards to outside world importance. If it had at least one example nation-wide press coverage... Max Semenik (talk) 10:09, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
 * 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.