Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aviastar-TU Flight 1906


 * 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. Stifle (talk) 15:35, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Aviastar-TU Flight 1906

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Not a notable aviation accident. No fatalities, a small number of serious injuries, no sustained media coverage. Not of historic significance to warrant inclusion in an encyclopaedia. HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   00:29, 28 July 2010 (UTC) *Comment The link to this discussion from the article is a redlink. Mjroots (talk) 06:12, 28 July 2010 (UTC) Now a blue link. YSSYguy (talk) 06:58, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:55, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep This is a very notable accident. It is the first hull-loss of a Tu-204, and the first hull-loss for Aviastar. Mjroots (talk) 06:12, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge to the Tupolev Tu-204 article per WP:AIRCRASH guidelines; as Mjroots notes, the accident meets two criteria (plus one more criterion he hasn't mentioned), but they are all in the same sub-section of the guidelines, so not notable enough for a stand-alone article IMO. The crash article is excessively detailed, so not all of the info would need to be merged. YSSYguy (talk) 06:58, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * One man's excessive detail is another's comprehensive coverage. Mjroots (talk)
 * Merge to the Tupolev Tu-204 article per WP:AIRCRASH guidelines. Hard landing, one crew member injured enough to go to hospital. Per Wikipedia is not a directory, Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information and in particular WP:NOTNEWS. Edison (talk) 16:47, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep most hull loss accidents have a page, and lets not forget that this took place in a major metro area so there is plenty of coverage if not in english. 66.220.101.210 (talk) 06:49, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep What is extremely interesting about this accident is that the huge medium range plane landed in forest without the fatalities. This happens very rarely in aviation and probably the only such case in the whole history. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.245.200.50 (talk) 20:50, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep A hull loss of a large airliner, which appears to have resulted in the operator being banned from carrying passengers. There appears to be enough sources here for a viable article.Nigel Ish (talk) 18:32, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep per Mjroots and Nigel Ish.  WackyWace  converse 10:32, 5 August 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.