Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Airlines Flight 550


 * 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. In addition to being on the wrong end of a 2:1 opinions ratio, the "keep" side mostly fails to convincingly address the "we are not a newspaper" argument, with few people making arguments concerning the event's lasting significance.  Sandstein  22:03, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

American Airlines Flight 550

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:NOTNEWS. Flight was never in danger. The incapacitation of someone at the controls of transportation, it happens, and unless that causes something more than a diversion, it  isn't notable. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 12:46, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States-related deletion discussions....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 13:17, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 13:17, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 13:17, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 13:17, 6 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep. WP:AIRCRASH: The accident was fatal to humans. Wide press coverage. 178.94.165.139 (talk) 13:49, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * The accident wasn't fatal at all because there was no accident. The one death had nothing to do with the plane. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 14:22, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Also note that WP:AIRCRASH "should not be applied to stand-alone accident articles, it is recommended that it not be cited at Articles for Deletion discussions for either keeping or deleting." Clarityfiend (talk) 23:05, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
 *  Keep or merge - The event received wide press coverage. If the article cannot be kept, it should be merged to American Airlines accidents and incidents. --Jax 0677 (talk) 13:56, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Would it make more sense to merge to a list of mid-air pilot deaths? Oiyarbepsy (talk) 14:23, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete by "WP is not news." The news media seems to think that something is more important because it happens on an airplane, but that's no reason for WP to follow the same standard. Borock (talk) 14:46, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - WP:NOTNEWS and, sadly, not a rare event it has happened many times before. Recency does not equal notability. SempreVolando (talk) 15:07, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * You're sort of correct in a sense. It isn't a rare event for a commercial flight to divert due to a medical emergency which you're right, however it is rare for the Pilot operating the aircraft to be the one with the emergency which doesn't happen often. Adog104 (talk) 00:01, 7 October 2015 (UTC)Adog104


 * Keep/Merge I know, I know the creator of the page wants to defend his article he wrote. No, that's not why I'm here. The page was created on a current aviation event which is important to know, the incident had wide media coverage (even outside the US), and this doesn't happen a lot. I understand this isn't a newspaper, however it is a notable event that happened. We could also transfer this article to the WikiNews (since looking into this more and since I'm new I just learned a thing and two).WP:AFD - WP:ATD-TRANS Adog104 (talk) 22:33, 6 October 2015 (UTC)Adog104
 * Keep: This will retain notability as it is rare that a member of the flight deck dies in flight. Although this is not the first occurrence, its rarity meets WP:N. --AEMoreira042281 (talk) 23:31, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete NOTNEWS Wikipedia is not a newspaper. Write an article for Wikinews instead!!--Petebutt (talk) 00:03, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
 * This is my first article up for deletion so it could be my simple mistake (I've only been here for a month/two). Refer to what I said previously which you could vote for a Transwikied which fits your comment better. Also forgot to add that I didn't mean to type the cause of death like a news article, read the source wrong, sorry. WP:ATD-TRANS Adog104 (talk) 00:21, 7 October 2015 (UTC)Adog104
 * Don't worry, nothing will be held against you. Look on the bright side, you have gone where angels fear to tread and survived:- the aircraft accident world of Wikipedia.--Petebutt (talk) 13:39, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Very true. Adog104 (talk) 18:09, 7 October 2015 (UTC)Adog104


 * Keep The fact that the pilot died mid-flight is significant, we don't have an article about the general concept, which is distinct from pilot error or suicide by pilot]. - Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 01:43, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep - Not only does this pass WP:GNG, sources note this is an "exceptionally rare" event. --Oakshade (talk) 20:15, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment - There are at least three events in recent years which are effectively identical (one is arguably more serious as it occurred at a more critical flight phase):
 * - GB Airways pilot dies
 * - Britannia Airways pilot dies
 * - Continental Airlines pilot dies
 * None of these events is even mentioned on Wikipedia. If this incident warrants an article, they all do. SempreVolando (talk) 17:53, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment - So shouldn't an article be granted admission since the incident hasn't been created on Wikipedia or create an article for that more notable incident? It's kind of weird that those incidents (or similar ones) haven't been listed or created on Wikipedia before even for their rare occurrences (unless there is an article somewhere, then please list it here). Whether this article is deleted or not, the least it could be granted would be a name change since it isn't listed. Adog104 (talk) 22:39, 11 October 2015 (UTC)Adog104
 * Comment It isn't weird. Airline flights that just happened are far more likely to find an editor who is willing to create an article than a airline flight that happened in the past. I'm one of the editors whose done articles on older crashes. In my case of the 45 accident articles I've created I did one for as far back as 1938 but I think the most recent accident article I did took place in 2002. WP:RECENTISM is the main reason for the focus on what has more recently happened. Another reason is sourcing an older crash can be difficult....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 14:57, 17 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep: Although it is not accident, but it is a captain death incident. If this article is keep, please use the new name "Captain death incident of American Airlines Flight 550".--Shwangtianyuan (talk) 02:55, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment - Agreed, since most people note this doesn't involve other lives or the plane in danger, a name change could make this article more appropriate. Adog104 (talk) 19:26, 8 October 2015 (UTC)Adog104


 * Delete Not particularly notable. Can think of a few other similar incidents that aren't recorded in Wikipedia. The plane was never in danger, since commercial airline pilots are trained to fly a plane by themselves, there was no damage to anything, and none of the passengers were physically injured. Yny501 (talk) 08:48, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep although I also considered deleting but compared to its neatness and sources, it may be acceptable as it attained some notability and attention. SwisterTwister   talk  06:07, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep per above and rename to Death of Micheal Johnston with leaving a redirect. 109.108.251.119 (talk) 23:35, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete not really notable or unusual it happens all the time, as something that is not unusual it is not worth mentioning anywhere else as this is not a news blog. MilborneOne (talk) 17:57, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment - I got to step in, but this doesn't happen all the time. It may happen to pilots in plane crashes or other situations, but pilot illness resulting in death mid flight does not happen all the time. Like most sources linked in the article and examples provided by others, the events happen rarely. Adog104 (talk) 19:30, 12 October 2015 (UTC)Adog104


 * Delete - not really notable, it happens a lot, this is not really warranted as a news blog. -- Eurovision Nim (talk to me)(see my edits) 02:45, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 *  Reply -,  ASSUMING  that this article should not exist, why should it not be merged into American Airlines accidents and incidents or American Airlines? --Jax 0677 (talk) 13:19, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Deletion versus merging

 * ,, , , ASSUMING  that this article should not exist, why should it not be merged into American Airlines accidents and incidents? , I don't think that there is an article about "mid-air pilot deaths". --Jax 0677 (talk) 16:35, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Because it does not meet the criteria for inclusion established for those sections - at WP:AIRCRASH. SempreVolando (talk) 17:43, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
 *  Reply - Actually, it is an "incident" that took place at American Airlines, thefefore, it should be included. Nowhere is WP:AIRCRASH mentioned at that article.  At the very least, it should redirect to American Airlines. --Jax 0677 (talk) 18:17, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
 * If there is a list of "incidents" involving American Airlines including it there would be better than keeping the article. No one can deny it was an incident covered by reliable sources.Borock (talk) 01:27, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
 *  Comment -, , I ask again,  ASSUMING  that this article should not exist, why should it not be merged into American Airlines accidents and incidents or American Airlines? --Jax 0677 (talk) 01:37, 16 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Because the list should only be accidents involving a hull loss or notable non-hull losses. If this article is deleted, then neither would apply....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 13:35, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
 *  Reply - American Airlines accidents and incidents does not say "hull loss" nor "notable non-hull losses", and this is an American Airlines flight, so merging or redirecting with history per WP:CHEAP to one of these articles would absolutely be appropriate. --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:10, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment WP:AIRCRASH lays out what is notable enough for inclusion on accident list. 550 doesn't fit the criteria....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 15:22, 17 October 2015 (UTC)


 *  Reply - "Nowhere is WP:AIRCRASH mentioned at that article. At the very least, it should redirect to American Airlines." --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:57, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment- If this were to be redirected (low chanced, but deletion is favored), it would more or less be belonging to U.S. Airways page since the aircraft was operated by U.S. Airways, but owned by American Airlines (Note: U.S. Airways has since merged fully with American Airlines recently ceasing operations which previously lead to the American Airlines Group founded back in 2013).Adog104 (talk) 18:12, 17 October 2015 (UTC)Adog104
 *  Reply - If the entire discussion before and after the relist is considered, it is steering toward No Consensus. --Jax 0677 (talk) 18:50, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Reply - ...Not really? I mean deletion is far greater on the second and the first has more keeps, but all together it votes towards deletion. Either way it will be deleted or the absolutely the least could be a Wiki-transfer (to WikiNews) or a merge; and the closing decides above all else. I would favor a Wiki-transfer the most now. Adog104 (talk) 16:31, 18 October 2015 (UTC)Adog104

Arbitrary section break
 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: No consensus yet sst✈ 08:57, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, sst✈ 08:57, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. This was not an accident and merely an incident. WP:NOTNEWS - not everything (incident) that gets a news article / attention can have a Wikipedia page. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk)  09:33, 14 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:EVENT and WP:NOTNEWS. Sideways713 (talk) 12:17, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete Will probably soon be forgotten, short media coverage only.--Müdigkeit (talk) 13:46, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per NOTNEWS. Passengers die on airliners, captains die on ships, bus drivers have heart attacks, etc. If no further fatalities occur as a result, they aren't notable. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:05, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete someone dies a natural death at work. If it wasn't in a plane, we wouldn't be having this discussion at all. Seems that it wouldn't be notable - the fact it was on a plane doesn't make it notable. The coverage in the news is typical of the "oh, interesting" to fill up space. Will there be any coverage of this a month from now, 2 years from now? no. Notability isn't temporary; this event was certainly temporary. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 05:00, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete mostly per WP:NOTNEWS. A medical emergency happened, the plane was diverted, and everyone but the captain lived happily ever after.  It's not an accident, so it can't be merged to a list of accidents.  I don't think routine incidents like this should have their own article.  Yes, the news media did report on it, but we are not beholden to create an article on every single topic that briefly bubbles to the top of Google News.  This is more applicable to Wikinews. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:17, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete Should be relegated to encyclopedia dramatica. Fudpukker (talk) 20:59, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per everything above, but could be mentioned in 2015 in aviation, for example. Brandmeistertalk  11:37, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
 *  Comment - I could also go along with redirecting with history to 2015 in aviation. --Jax 0677 (talk) 02:14, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 *  Comment  The individual page does not need to exist (a redirection is pointless in my opinion), so I would suggest it be added to part of 2015 in aviation, or it can be included in some part of the pages of American Airlines or US Airways.

 Final comment - My final comment, while searching air crashes on Wikipedia (1997-2010), I found that there are other Wikipedia articles that have the same context as Flight 550: Which by these two alone, Flight 550 seems to fit snug in between them in context, however this event is more rare, like many have already established in the news.
 * Delete I agree with the above comment. It doesn't need its own article; it's not particularly notable as the FO took over the flight and the safety of the aircraft and passengers were never in danger.  It was a medical emergency rather than a flight emergency. smrgeog (talk) 18:53, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
 * United Airlines Flight 826 - Passenger dies of turbulence injuries, lands safely.
 * Olympic Airways Flight 417 - Passenger dies of second hand smoke, lands safely, aftermath following lawsuit.


 * After researching, I realized that it can't be classified as an "accident" since the person, inside the aircraft, suffered injuries from natural causes (which is according to Annex 13, section (a.) enforced by the Chicago Convention). However this can still be classified as an "incident" since it was an occurrence that happened inside the aircraft mid-flight, it was a notable event covered by numerous sources (including outside the United States), and it is still believed to be a rare occurrence that doesn't happen often as accidents. At this time I did not edit the article as much since the AFD, however I left on the talk page more information that could be added (if the sources coincide with NOT NEWS). Thank you all for your feed back too (whether against or in favor). Adog104 (talk) 23:57, 20 October 2015 (UTC)Adog104
 *  Comment  This flight has no lawsuit nor is related to the setting (an aircraft), whereas turbulence is a part of aviation. If there was clear proof that aircraft ventiliation systems caused the death of the pilot or something like that, then the two above examples would be applicable to this scenario, but since the pilot's death is not recorded as being related to aviation, nor does it have any legal implications, I think a delete would be the most appropriate. As for 'covered outside the United States', many other aircraft incidents that are not recorded on Wikipedia have been as well - just because two flights are on Wikipedia doesn't mean 20 more similar aren't, and the two examples given may also be deleted in the future. Honestly, pilots dying mid-air isn't that rare, which is sad, but just the way it is. It's not necessarily a 'rare occurence'. Yny501 (talk) 12:13, 22 October 2015 (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.