Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1986 Ljósufjöll 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 keep. (non-admin closure) — Mhawk10 (talk) 21:44, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

1986 Ljósufjöll air crash

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

General aviation crashes are very common and rarely notable unless somebody notable is on board. WP:NOTNEWS applies. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 22:18, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 22:18, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 22:18, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 22:18, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iceland-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 22:18, 10 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep Delete - as per WP:NOTNEWSPAPER. Just another routine light aircraft accident, one of thousands that happen globally each year. These are WP:RUNOFTHEMILL, just like car accidents are - no notable people (with bios on Wikipedia) were involved and there are no WP:LASTING effects, did not result any changes in maintenance procedures, ATC procedures, Airworthiness Directives or anything else. - Ahunt (talk) 00:12, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
 * the article author has added additional information to the article after you wrote this describing air industry changes in Iceland resulting from this incident, you may want to take another look. RecycledPixels (talk) 23:51, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I did see that and tried to read the refs, but they are all scans of newspapers in Icelandic, which is not my strongest suite. It is possible that they support the claims of changed procedures, or not. It would be helpful if someone could translate the para or two about what changes were instituted and post them here, so we can evaluate the evidence. - Ahunt (talk) 23:56, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I used this link and then Google translate to get the gist of it. RecycledPixels (talk) 00:03, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you! That was helpful. I think there is enough evidence in that report that the accident resulted in an increased meteorology budget and changes in dissemination of weather information that this qualifies under WP:LASTING. Accordingly I am happy to change my position to "keep" on that basis. - Ahunt (talk) 00:08, 12 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete - wp:aircrash.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 06:38, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep passes WP:GNG with the sources already in the article. Light aircraft accidents might often be lightly covered around the world, but they often get heavy coverage in Iceland and this is still being covered almost 40 years later. For instance, seven years after the accident, it received a two page coverage in Morgunblaðið, the largest newspaper in Iceland, in 1993. In 2020 the largest television and radio operator in Iceland, RÚV, featuring the accident in a three part radio show (which was previously available here until August 2021 and archived here but MP3 recordings can be accessed here). With multiple significant coverage, including none-news stories, in at least 1986, 1993 and 2020, there is no denying that the article passes the general notability guideline (GNG). Closing admin should also note that wp:aircrash is not an official Wikipedia guideline and thus an invalid argument. He might also note that WP:GNG does not require that anyone involved in the accident has to have been notable . Alvaldi (talk) 07:48, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
 * The coverage also included this three-page feature from 1987 in Helgarpósturinn, that the nominator had removed from the article (I assume in good faith that he was unaware of its content), that covers the accident and its aftermath thoroughly, amongst it the effects of the accident on the goverments regulations regarding passenger compensations for plane accidents. So now it has significant coverage from at least 1986, 1987, 1993 and 2020. Alvaldi (talk) 08:56, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Regarding WP:LASTING, the accident resulted in changes made by the Civil Aviation Administration and the goverment in regulations to increase the flow of weather information between pilots and the Icelandic Meteorological Office. It also led to an overhaul of "how air operators' logbooks, brochures and other educational material published by the Civil Aviation Administration are used in pilot training and retraining, e.g. in the aptitude test." Alvaldi (talk) 09:25, 11 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete WP:NOTNEWS, WP:RUNOFTHEMILL, and so on. Definitely does not pass WP:GNG as no one involved in the crash even has an article. sixty nine   • whaddya want? •  09:23, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete - WP:NOTNEWS. Jauerbackdude?/dude. 19:47, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. The article author has made persuasive arguments above that this article meets WP:GNG due to the amount of ongoing news coverage on a national scale about this incident.  In addition, air industry regulations were updated or modified as a result of the incident according to sources added after the initial nomination.  This isn't a weekend pilot crashing a small plane one day, this apparently made quite a splash, so meets the applicable notability guidelines.   RecycledPixels (talk) 23:54, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:AIRCRASH, specifically about how this changes national regulations and procedures. No matter how light the aircraft is, if it changes national procedures I think it satisfies the notability requirement. The accident still being discussed in 2022 shows that it is WP:LASTING and therefore notable. SunDawn talk  00:35, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep as it caused an regulaton change in national aviation.--Snævar (talk) 13:07, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per the improvements made since nomination, and the demonstrated impact this accident had on aviation safety in Iceland. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 02:02, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep due to the changes in aviation safety in Iceland.Gusfriend (talk) 06:01, 17 February 2022 (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.