Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2023 Murrieta plane 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__ to French Valley Airport. The keeps did offer solid arguments, however ones that were largely refuted by the merge camp. The merge arguments were mainly WP:ROTM and WP:AIRCRASH. The keeps refuted it was uncertain if this would have WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE and that AIRCRASH was a local consensus of WP Aviation. That last point was refuted with the fact that this AfD is just as much a local consensus, and in lack of a global consensus, local ones should be considered. And, to finish this close, a reminder that the article can always be restored from the history if continued coverage happens. (non-admin closure) C LYDE TALK TO ME/STUFF DONE (I will not see your reply if you don't mention me) 03:57, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

2023 Murrieta plane crash

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

Another tragic but WP:RUNOFTHEMILL crash of a small general aviation aircraft that attracted substantial WP:BREAKING coverage because it happened during a slow news cycle, but seems unlikely to have any WP:LASTING impact, as it involved no Wikinotable people and occurred during a missed approach in poor visibility—routine circumstances for a multiple-fatality GA accident. Per longstanding consensus in the WP:AVIATION community, this accident is not notable and can be adequately summarized in the article about the intended destination, the French Valley Airport. Carguychris (talk) 22:07, 9 July 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed,Rosguill talk 03:27, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. Carguychris (talk) 22:07, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Currently we don't know if this topic will meet WP:PERSISTENCE, so given the current state of things it's better to preserve the verifiable information editors have worked on, so I do not recommend deletion. To avoid the possible need for a future AfD, perhaps a merge to French Valley Airport per what seems to be a reasonable long-lived essay at WP:AIRCRASH. The only part of that essay I fundamentally disagree with is that it shouldn't be cited here. AfD needs to be a reflection of Wikipedia's broader consensus, and there's a lot of good discussion in the talk page there that editors here can reference. If the subject does end up meeting WP:PERSISTENCE it can be split back out when an editor chooses to expand it.  &mdash;siro&chi;o 22:54, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Weak merge Little notability in the event and per WP:AIRCRASH, this crash shouldn't have an article. This article should be merged into French Valley Airport and could be mentioned in Cessna Citation II. If there is persistent coverage of this event in the future and there is significant changes, then this article can be restored. Still a bit too soon for me to make a conclusive decision. RandomInfinity17 (talk - contributions) 00:06, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Weak keep for now. Your points on notability are valid, and very likely this crash is not notable and will not merit an article, but why not wait a week or two, allow it to exist so further information can be added to a place, and then decide whether to delete and merge it back into the other relevant articles? Also, why did you delete the mention in Cessna Citation II in the first place? I understand you are AfDing the article written about it, and intend to include it in the airport article, but there is no reason to remove the information about the crash from that section on the airplane model in the interim period. Criticalus (talk) 11:31, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Weak keep for now. Right now we don't know if it will have WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE so we should wait and see. Note that any local consensus by the WP:AVIATION community is irrelevant in this discussion as it is, well, WP:LOCALCONSENSUS. Alvaldi (talk) 17:05, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge. Tragic incident, but crashes of small planes aren't that rare. Article does not really substantiate why in particular this crash is more notable then any other with this death number. DarkSide830 (talk) 02:51, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep i believe this achieves notabiluty. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2crzppul (talk • contribs) 10:18, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and California.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 10:00, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete General aviation plane crashes occur frequently, and this has already fallen out of the news cycle. No issue with an ATD, but should not have a stand alone article. SportingFlyer  T · C  12:09, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Weak merge to airport per RandomInfinity17. If not merged, I'd say keep for now per WP:RAPID. A business jet crash is a bit out of the ordinary, but on the whole I'm just not seeing any likely pathway to larger significance here, so I don't really think we need to stand on ceremony and might as well just merge it now. But keeping this as a separate article for a while, just in case, also seems fine. (While it's unlikely to affect the outcome of this discussion, since LOCALCONSENSUS was raised above I'll state for the record that I don't see any way that a small group of randos like ourselves on AFD can be considered to occupy a higher level of consensus than a longstanding Wikiproject; while I am not a great fan of the kritarchy in general, I think the Arbcom statement linked from WP:CONLEVEL says it well: on subjects where there is no global consensus, a local consensus should be taken into account.) -- Visviva (talk) 02:56, 19 July 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.