Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2023 Gold Coast 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 keep. Almost unanimous opinion to Keep this article right now. Liz Read! Talk! 04:24, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

2023 Gold Coast mid-air collision

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

While the event is certainly tragic and has received wide coverage in the immediate aftermath, this article fails WP:NOTNEWS as a single event that has no established enduring notability. —  CR 4 ZE (T &bull; C)  05:23, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Aviation,  and Australia.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 10:21, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Note 2: this article was renamed at 11:46, 7 January 2023‎ (UTC) – "" → "2023 Gold Coast mid-air collision".  P.I. Ellsworth &thinsp;, ed.  put'r there 12:07, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Snowball keep. These kinds of events usually have an entry of their own.  See Mid-air collision.  Plenty of coverage from reliable sources. _  MB190417  _ (talk) 15:47, 7 January 2023 (UTC)


 * A very ridiculous tag to add to the article. It will have large implications on future helicopter safety in Australia and internationally. Per item 2 in NOTNEWS, It is not routine for helicopters to fatally crash into each other let alone in the tourism capital of Australia. There is large public interest and they have the right to be informed. The tag has been removed. Canolanext (talk) 16:03, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
 * @Canolanext: I've added the tag back to the page. This is an AfD, so you can't remove the tag as you would in a WP:DEPROD. _  MB190417  _ (talk) 16:35, 7 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep. Passes WP:GNG & WP:COVERAGE with many reliable sources cited, some from major non-local news sites (CNA from Singapore and BBC from UK are 2 examples), thus passing WP:GEOSCOPE. Talking about lasting impacts, per WP:LASTING, "It may take weeks or months to determine whether or not an event has a lasting effect. This does not, however, mean recent events with unproven lasting effect are automatically non-notable." Besides, considering the nature of the collision (which took place when one heli was departing and one was landing), this event is likely going to result in recommendations or changes to how to avoid such future collisions. I would suggest that the article be nominated again after the final report by ATSB is published, should it be found to be non-notable. SBS6577P (talk) 23:53, 7 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep. Topics on aviation accidents, however, seemingly insignificant are likely to contribute to the body of knowledge on aviation. Wikipedia has many articles covering aviation incidents. For example, the article 2015 Villa Castelli mid-air collision covers a similar incident. The article does not meet the criteria for deletion. The assertion that the article lacks notability should be rejected for the following reasons:
 * The article describes a high-level aviation accident. I would agree that the article is not notable if the topic was on the pilot but this is not the case.
 * A report on the incident is being produced so knowledge is likely to persist (even after publicity on the accident itself fades over time).
 * The information is independently verifiable.
 * There is likely to be significant new facts about the topic so the article is likely to emerge beyond a stub article.
 * Keep. This event has global significance in the aviation industry as mid-air collisions of two helicopters are exceedingly rare, especially since the two helicopters were not formation flying (the 2015 Villa Castelli mid-air collision and 2019 Ménaka mid-air collision involved helicopters flying in formation). Stuart hc (talk) 01:27, 10 January 2023 (UTC)


 * This article should certainly be retained, as mentioned by others it has a significance and notability for aviation safety worldwide. Douge1999 (talk) 04:56, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Hrbm14 (talk) 01:34, 8 January 2023 (UTC) Hrbm14 (talk) 01:34, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
 * An alternative is to merge the content into an existing article. This should also be rejected for the following reasons:
 * The accident has many sub-topics and factors and so merits its own article to mention these factors.
 * Keep - The rationale provided for deleting this article is quite frankly ridiculous. There are innumerable articles on Wikipedia detailing similar tragedies, and this one in particular has national significance for Australia (it didn't just "make the news", but has indeed been a major news item broadcast across the entire country, particularly in light of two other recent tragedies that have occurred almost immediately beforehand; all three of these tragedies have occurred in the same state, Queensland). This tragedy also in particular has significant implications for aviation safety in Australia, which alone makes it notable enough to warrant its own article. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 02:04, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
 * To clarify, the other two recent tragedies in Queensland are (1) cop killers and (2) a fatal home invasion. These sorts of events are pretty common in a country like the United States, but they are rare in Australia. These two, along with the helicopter collision, have caused something of a crisis here in Australia. The entire nation is shocked, and major reforms are being carried out or planned in response to these three tragedies. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 09:37, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep - There are many articles on wikipedia detailing aviation accidents of similar magnitude. This one is no different and should be kept. I don't feel like this is WP:NotNews because it is very likely that this tragedy has major impacts and may change and improve aviation safety in the future and it is a Major crash that has impacted Australia hard and there are many sources on it. PatrickChiao (talk) 02:44, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep. Enough in-depth coverage. Agreed with Jargo Nautilus as per their say "The rationale provided for deleting this article is quite frankly ridiculous." Twinkle1990 (talk) 08:47, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep How can one determine if the event has lasting notability less than a week after it took place? Garuda3 (talk) 10:05, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment. A lot of the keep votes claim that notability is (probably) in the offing. That's not a valid reason, just speculation. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:12, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Appeals to WP:EVENTCRIT#2 are perfectly valid... what are you talking about? —  Red-tailed hawk (nest) 21:20, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep at this time. There is WP:INDEPTH coverage from a diverse set of independent, reliable sources. The scope of the event is of (at minimum) national importance. For those reasons, this satisfies WP:EVENTCRIT#2, meaning that the event is very likely to be notable. The coverage in the next few months will determine how WP:LASTING the coverage is, and I think it's more than reasonable to not delete the article so soon; I see ample reasons to presume notability, but rationales that this is affirmatively not notable are extremely weak. —  Red-tailed hawk (nest) 21:20, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep - the comments that this is asingle event that has no established enduring notability is interesting, in view of the ramifications for transport safety, helicopter operations and air safety in Australia. I would think that a clear knowledge of the operations of the ATSB and its findings as to air safety/safety issues, and how they resolve events such as this one, will affect the operation of tourist oriented helicopter travel by this event for years to come, if not decades.JarrahTree 03:27, 12 January 2023 (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.