Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2010 County Down helicopter 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   delete. Ron Ritzman (talk) 17:12, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

2010 County Down helicopter crash

 * – ( View AfD View log ) •

Wikipedia is not the news. MickMacNee (talk) 21:02, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Agreed, take this to Wikinews. Also, no evidence of notability. Sven Manguard  Talk  22:14, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete I totally agree with MickMacNee and Sven that this doesn't belong here, and I can't forsee any way that this would have historic significance. Further breaking news edits can go to Wikinews here  (and it looks like the article's author has made at least one contribution to the edit).  Unfortunately, every day is filled with tragedies where four people or more are killed, these being the most recent: .  Mandsford 00:14, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. - The Bushranger Return fire Flank speed 02:25, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Northern Ireland-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:05, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:05, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:05, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete unless any Wikinotable people are involved. The aircraft is an Agusta A109 according to Pprune, which does not put it into the "over 5,700 kg MTOW (large helicopter)" category. Mjroots (talk) 05:35, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note No Wiki-notable people involved. Charles Stisted being a friend of Prince Charles does not notability confer. The Ian Wooldridge that was killed is not the wikinotable person of that name. Mjroots (talk) 08:55, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete no sign of notability, tragic but just another helicopter accident. MilborneOne (talk) 11:08, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. The level of notability used for air accidents seems to be a bit random. All of these have third-party media coverage, but I can't see a clear pattern for that does and doesn't fail WP:NOTNEWS. I don't want to go down the route of WP:OTHERSTUFF, but would it beneficial to have a proper discussion of how much coverage we expect for an air accident to be considered notable? Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 20:20, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The policies are described in WP:EVENT ("An event is presumed to be notable if it receives significant, non-routine coverage that persists over a period of time. Coverage should be in multiple reliable sources with national or global scope.") and WP:NOTNEWS ("Wikipedia considers the enduring notability of persons and events. While news coverage can be useful source material for encyclopedic topics, most newsworthy events do not qualify for inclusion.") When it comes to recent events, obviously, one has to go by their own assessment of whether it's likely that an event will be receiving coverage that persists over a period of time, or whether it's likely that it will have "enduring notability".   People tend to go by their own experience with other events when it comes to making that assessment of likelihood.  There has to be a balance between the two extremes, one of which would be to not allow any event to get an article until after a waiting period, or keeping all articles on the chance, no matter how unrealistic, that it will stand the test of time.  There is a tendency for people to want to be the very first to write an article about the most recent "breaking news" that they pick up on their television, which is described in WP:RECENT.  I think this is one of those cases.  I'll be happy to consider any argument as to why this event would be historically significant.  Mandsford 23:31, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete At this moment it is just a news item, without any sign of enduring notability. Armbrust  Talk  Contribs  15:29, 26 October 2010 (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.