Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bahia Bakari


 * 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. There is merit to the concept of merging this to the article about the plane crash but that is not for AfD to decide per se - the only thing that is obvious is that there is a consensus to keep this information. Discussion on whether or not to maintain it at its current title or to merge it elsewhere should continue on the article's talk page itself. Shereth 22:18, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Bahia Bakari
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

It is clear, as per WP:BLP1E, that something should be done about this article. Personally, I'm completely open to a merge/redirect to Yemenia Flight 626, and in all honesty I would be inclined to !vote that way myself. However, as a WP:BLP, this article is worthy of at least a semi-procedural AfD, just to ensure that a merge would not be improper. Cosmic Latte (talk) 23:06, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. Per WP:BLP1E: "If the event is significant, and/or if the individual's role within it is substantial, a separate article for the person may be appropriate. Individuals notable for well-documented events, such as John Hinckley, Jr., fit into this category. The significance of an event or individual should be indicated by how persistent the coverage is in reliable secondary sources." The subject of this article is one of a handful of people in history who were "sole survivors" of airline crashes. She has very high notability world wide, as Google attests ("bahia bakari", 293,000 hits at the moment), and that notability is unlikely to abate and very likely to increase. Other sole airline crash survivors are celebrities, written about by the news media, many years after the crash (normally for the rest of their lives), e.g. when a new sole survivor becomes known. There was renewed interest in and fresh interviews with Juliane Köpcke after this accident. This is exactly where BLP1E makes its exception. Crum375 (talk) 23:24, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: I was actually going to mention Juliane Köpcke in the nomination, but forgot to do so amidst all my formatting goof-ups. As the subject of a Werner Herzog film, Wings of Hope, and as a PhD scholar, Köpcke is no longer known for only one event. Things are known (and stated in Köpcke's article) about Köpcke's life before the crash, her experience during the ordeal, and her activities afterwards. At this point, the Bahia Bakari article is only about the crash and rescue; it does not even look like a biographical article about the girl. Bakari might very well become the next Köpcke, but it is really too soon to tell. Cosmic Latte (talk) 23:49, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * You make is sound like "being known for one event" automatically prohibits a WP article per BLP1E, but it doesn't, as per the Hinckley example. In other words, we'd like to weed out "flash in the pan" type events, which are notable for a short time only, perhaps with mostly local news coverage, and then the person becomes obscure and disappears from the radar. In the case of "sole airline crash survivors", these people become celebrities for the rest of their lives. They are interviewed or give talks, they become subjects of books and movies, and are mentioned when similar events occur. Generally, they are world famous, although typically more famous in their own country, as Bahia will likely be in Comoros and France. You can be world famous for the rest of your life for being a sole airline crash survivor no less that for trying to kill a president. Crum375 (talk) 00:23, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: I'm well aware of all these possibilities; hence the last sentence of my preceding comment, and in particular the link to WP:BALL. A lot of crashes have left sole survivors, but how many of them have become "celebrities"? Take Northwest Airlines Flight 255, for example. After 22 years, what do we know about the sole survivor, Cecelia Cichan? According to her article, we know when she was born (although we don't quite know how we know this, because we can't find those details in any of the references); we know "a popular, but untrue, story" about the crash (although we ought to doubt that such discredited speculation--about two people, one dead and one alive--belongs in a BLP); and we know about her university graduation (even though we're not sure if we ought to know this, as we find this BLP factoid in a primary source, reminding us of the WP:PSTS section of WP:OR). In other words, we don't know very much. If she's a "celebrity" in her home country (which also happens to be mine), she certainly evaded my detection (not that I have an outstanding grasp of popular culture, but you get my drift), quite possibly in no small part because her "relatives...shielded her from public attention." In Bakari's case, we thus have A) a case of sole-survivorship, which appears not to be a reliable predictor of celebrity status; B) a consequent WP:BLP, which needs to be addressed with caution; and C) a minor, to whom we could reasonably apply WP:BLP (including WP:BLP1E) with extraordinary care--especially given the possibility that she, like Cichan, could end up being legitimately "shielded...from public attention." Cosmic Latte (talk) 00:56, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * If we choose our criteria properly, I think you'll see the distinction. One criterion has to be total passengers killed in the crash &mdash; in this case we have 152 total who died, more than in any of your example list, where some are less than 50. (BTW, AFAICT, this would be a distinction by itself &mdash; "sole survivor of the deadliest crash".) Another criterion has to be the survivor's age: if it's an infant, who can't really describe their experience and hasn't done anything special to survive, I think they would become more obscure as they age. In this case, floating alone in pitch darkness (initially), without a life vest, unable to swim, fighting high waves fatigue and injuries, for thirteen hours, is quite unusual, similar perhaps to Juliane Köpcke, but none of the others (AFAICT). Yet another is current notability: yes, it may decay over time, but with Google and other engines holding their data indefinitely, the present notability won't disappear, and may even rise. In our case, there was also the issue of a French government minister personally escorting the survivor back to France in a government jet, where on arrival she was hailed by the press as a "miracle child." These things don't fade away overnight, if at all. Overall, the google hits, which are already 293,000 for "bahia bakari", are not going to disappear. My guess is that the vast majority of BLPs on WP have far less google hits, esp. if you weed out the WP-related ones. Crum375 (talk) 01:22, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: I'd think that the total number of fatalities could work against the notability of survivors. The more members of a sample (e.g., Flight 626 passengers), the greater the sample's expected diversity (e.g., survivorship vs. fatality). The fewer the people in a crash, the less likely any of them will stand out from the rest, and so the more peculiar it is when somebody does stand out. I'm not saying that Bakari didn't do anything special to survive or that she hasn't received special attention because she survived; indeed, I'm not saying that she isn't notable or that her article should be deleted (I opened it up to that possibility as a BLP precaution, but would be inclined to merge the material with Yemenia Flight 626). But we don't know much about her, and her article does not actually say anything about her, apart from noting her involvement in the crash and rescue. If this very non-biographical article about an underage WP:BLP1E tries to pass itself off as a biography, will it really "be written conservatively, with regard for the subject's privacy" (as per BLP)? I'm inclined to think not, at least until she starts giving interviews and discussing things to the point of communicating a desire to be singled out for individual attention, and to the point of allowing the (uncertain) potential for her celebrity status to materialize. For the time being, I'd think that Yemenia Flight 626 has the capacity to describe her involvement to the lengths prescribed by WP:N, WP:V, and WP:RS, and to describe it within the bounds set forth by WP:SS and WP:BLP. Cosmic Latte (talk) 02:02, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I have added to the article the notable fact that she is the sole survivor of the deadliest of the 14 airline crashes with a sole survivor since 1970. As far as what's more notable, I think you'd agree that a sole survivor of a plane crash where (say) 3 people died would be unremarkable, whereas a sole survivor of a crash with (say) 100 people would be far rarer, 5 total since 1970 (including this one). Again, of all these known "sole survivor" cases, her accident was the deadliest. Also, as I noted above, if you include her 13 hours survival ordeal without a life vest, not knowing how to swim, fighting high waves in the dark, it adds even more to her notability. I think her full story wouldn't logically fit into the accident article (except in summary style) because someone reading about the accident wants to know only general details about the girl, and conversely, someone reading about the girl would want to know only general details about the accident. This is why summary style is the best solution. WP is not paper, and I think this is the most reader-friendly way to handle it. Crum375 (talk) 02:33, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: Yes, one minority among a large majority will stand out more than one minority among a small majority. The fact that a "minority of one" (as opposed to a minority of, say, two or three or four) survived may be emotionally (although not statistically) poignant, while the fact that only a minority (of any size) of passengers survived is statistically unusual (see, also cited below). But I'm not arguing that she isn't brave or special or "notable". This last term, by the way, gets tossed around a lot throughout WP, but ends up creating circular arguments on AfDs. A WP:NOTABLE topic is, technically, one that ought to have its own article, while an AfD exists to determine the fate of individual articles. So an AfD argument centered vaguely on "notability" can start to look like, "this topic should/shouldn't have its own article (i.e., it should/shouldn't survive AfD) because it should/shouldn't have its own article (i.e., it is/isn't notable)." Bear in mind that the general notability guidelines defer immediately to WP:RS, which in turn refers us immediately to WP:BLP, which in turn contains the WP:BLP1E section on which I based my nomination. Cosmic Latte (talk) 05:20, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep as notable enought. The main article would be too large. Elmao (talk) 03:35, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Question: What are you agreeing with? The indentation leaves it unclear as to whom you're responding to. Cosmic Latte (talk) 05:22, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * on the fence - Vesna Vulović has an article and she was the sole survivor of JAT Flight 367 with no prior or subsequent notability, save that she holds the Guiness record for surviving the highest fall without a parachute. (I'd argue that confers enough notability to justify her article.) For Bahia Bakari, she's the sole survivor of a crash, (yes, the deadliest crash with a sole survivor since 1970), but is that enough to establish notability? I'm not sure; giving it more thought. -- Flyguy649 talk 03:22, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * That article could do with a cleanup as it contains more about the attack than it probably should. That said, her guiness title combined with political activity in Serbia during the early 90s confers further notability, excluding her from 1E. Making any such assumptions about the subject of this AfD would by crystalballery at a high level. Usrnme h8er (talk · contribs) 08:37, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep World famous miracles are notable. DGG (talk) 04:28, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: Nobody is saying that the occurrence isn't notable. As for a "miracle", the remarkable thing about this crash is that so many of the people died. Most people usually survive plane crashes--especially those that, like this one, occur during landing . Perhaps a secondary "miracle" is the fact that so many people are pointing to the expected silver lining, rather than to the unexpected loss of so much life. Even so, I'm not saying that the silver lining should be minimized, only that it may be overstated as a WP:BLP1E with its own article. Cosmic Latte (talk) 04:51, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * As for uniqueness and notability, per the source provided, this specific accident, of which Bakari was a sole survivor, is one of only five sole survivor crashes since 1970 which had more than 100 persons on board, and 14 overall. As I noted above, Ms. Bakari is the sole survivor of the deadliest of all sole survivor airline crashes since 1970 (possibly ever, but we only have a source for 1970+). Her name, "Bahia Bakari", rings up 293,000 google hits at the moment, in a wide variety of publications, world wide. Crum375 (talk) 12:56, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: Again, I'm not saying that she isn't special or unique or commendable or "notable" or whatever. What I'm trying to get at is that she has not been shown to be the subject of sufficient biographical coverage to warrant an article distinct from the page covering the one event for which she is known. She might very well "be numbered among an exclusive club." On that note, however, when The Survivors Club, themselves, reported on Bakari, they noted that "she is a very, very shy girl"--all the more reason, I would think, to stress her privacy to the maximum that WP allows. All of those WP:GHITS do not have to abide by WP:BLP or by any other encyclopedic regulations. WP can and must adhere to greater standards than a search engine. Cosmic Latte (talk) 14:31, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * WP's primary role is to present the "sum of human knowledge" to the world. Yes, we have to be careful and sensitive, esp. about BLPs, and even more so for young people, and this is why the article steers clear of her personal details, like exact DOB, address (or even town!), siblings, etc., despite their being reliably sourced. But if a person reading the papers or watching TV googles for "bahia bakari" and gets 200,000+ hits, they would like to find out more about her on WP. Not the intimate personal details, but her survival story and its aftermath. And we can't censor that, or force it inside a small section of an accident article, where the focus is (and should be) on why and how the accident happened. Minister Alain Joyandet said about the "miracle girl": "In the midst of the mourning, there is Bahia. It is a miracle, it is an absolutely extraordinary battle for survival ... It's an enormous message that she sends to the world ... almost nothing is impossible." Are we saying that a person like that, who can inspire future survivors to persevere when all seems lost, should remain obscure and censored? Should we stifle that "enormous message"? Crum375 (talk) 08:14, 9 July 2009 (UTC)


 * P.S. See also my comment above with regard to notability. Cosmic Latte (talk) 05:26, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Merge into Yemenia Flight 626. It's only a matter of time before it fails WP:NOTABILITY. -- Ray-Ginsay (talk) 05:30, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note that two other sole survivors which have wiki articles, Juliane Köpcke and Cecelia Cichan, are still notable despite the years since their accident, and are mentioned and/or interviewed by the press whenever a new sole survivor accident occurs. Note also that Bakari is now a survivor of the deadliest sole survivor accident since 1970 (or possibly ever, since we currently have sourcing only for 1970+). Crum375 (talk) 13:04, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: Köpcke clearly has achieved independent notability (for reasons mentioned earlier), whereas Cichan's article strikes me as just as problematic as Bakari's, if not considerably more so (also for reasons noted above). What Köpcke and Cichan do share with one another (but not with Bakari) is the ability to be viewed in hindsight. We don't know how Bakari's life will look once the dust has settled, but would do well to err on the side of caution in a BLP. Cosmic Latte (talk) 14:41, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * True, we don't have hindsight specifically in Bakari's case, but we do have relevant precedents and common sense: a. When you have 290,000 google hits for a person, they don't suddenly fade into obscurity; b. The previous "sole survivors" of large crashes are still notable; and c. Bakari is a survivor of the deadliest sole survivor airline crash since 1970, and quite possibly ever; these types of "records" tend to stick in the media's (and public's) memory and notability scale. So to not have an article for a "miracle" person with this much notability and public recognition, would be incompatible with WP's BLP inclusion standards, where I assume the vast majority of BLP subjects have far less than 290,000 google hits and overall notability. Crum375 (talk) 15:13, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Merge into Yemenia Flight 626. This is a clear cut BLP1E, the event is notable, even the survival is notable, but the person who survived is not. This is exactly the intention of 1E, with WP:BIO1E stating "In considering whether or not to create separate articles, the degree of significance of the event itself and the degree of significance of the individual's role within it should be considered.". In this case the significance of the indivduals role is entirely coincidental and not actually connected to the individual. The entire participation was to be unlucky and have a really rough time. To the extent that anything "sticks" in the minds of media and people, it's the event not the person, about whom the only relevant thing is having been the participant in the event. Usrnme h8er (talk · contribs) 12:07, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
 * The individual in this case was one who managed to stay afloat for 13 hours clinging to debris in the middle of the ocean, despite being unable to swim, fighting pitch darkness, high waves, injuries (including a broken collar bone), thirst, fatigue, not to mention mental distress of having lost her mother and seeing 152 people drown. If that's not a "significant individual role", I don't know what is. This was enough to inspire a French government minister to say about her: "In the midst of the mourning, there is Bahia. It is a miracle, it is an absolutely extraordinary battle for survival ... It's an enormous message that she sends to the world ... almost nothing is impossible." In addition, Bakari is currently the "record holder" as a survivor of the deadliest sole survivor airline crash since 1970, and quite likely in history. The other sole airline crash survivors have wiki articles (separate from their crash articles), and their crashes were less deadly than hers. She also has 387,000 google hits, which probably puts her in the top percentile for WP BLP articles notability-wise. In summary, she is excluded from BLP1E because of her remarkable and notable individual survival effort, as attested to by numerous media reports worldwide. In addition, her being a record holder, and member of a tiny group of sole airline crash survivors (only five for crashes of 100 or more fatalities since 1970, possibly ever), keeps her notable indefinitely.Crum375 (talk) 12:51, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Big numbers and other content notwithstanding, this is a perfect example of 1E. The survival is impressive, notable and encyclopaedic but this does not dervie through the incident to the person (well, she may be impressive, obviously I've never met her so it's not a stretch for me to leave that option open). Heck, you'd even be better off with an article about the survival (independent of the crash article) than a BLP. In general, if a persons notability derives entirely from one event it is better to cover the event than the person and leave a redirect to the event (paraphrase BLP1E). You make a mention of John Hinckley, Jr. above and while the fundamentals of the comparison are fair (both peoples "fame" derives from a single event) Hinckleys relevance long term has been proven as the subject of extensive writing and as a recurring mention in television and movies. If conditions change and Bahia becomes a motivational speaker/author, subject of extensive fiction/non-fiction, a notable air safety activist or first Emperor of the Moon, then we would need an article about the person to link the content about the other notability with the content about the plane crash. All these things may one day be, but that's where BLP1E often (almost always) links in with WP:CRYSTAL. We have no grounds on which to assume that miss Bakari will ever be mentioned again outside listings of sole surivors. Usrnme h8er (talk · contribs) 07:35, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
 * BLP1E says: "If the event is significant, and/or if the individual's role within it is substantial, a separate article for the person may be appropriate.... the significance of an event or individual should be indicated by how persistent the coverage is in reliable secondary sources" In our case, we really have two initial events: the crash, and the survival/rescue. Both will have an aftermath which may be notable on its own. For the subject of this article, her role in the survival/rescue event is substantial &mdash; she is the event. The relative notability of the two related events is indicated by 10 times more google hits for "bahia bakari" (200,000+), vs. "flight 626 (16,000+). Clearly the girl is far more notable, specifically for her unique unprecedented survival effort, and there are no known single survivors of airline accidents in history. Clearly BLP1E does not apply to her any more than to Hinckley, because of her "substantial role" in her event, and the persistent coverage. There is a very small percentage of current wiki BLP articles with her notability. By the way, "John Hinckley" himself, the poster-boy of the BLP1E exclusion example, gets only 112,000 Google hits, roughly half of "Bahia Bakari". Crum375 (talk) 07:59, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I end my participation in this debate with two simple points and one piece of advice. WP:BLP1E and WP:CRYSTAL are my policy links and WP:GOOGLEHITS is my advice. You claim persistent coverage but there is no proof of that. The accident was so recent that reprintings of a single significant event will give the impression of persistence, even if the number of news hits (and I don't care about google.com, I really don't, you could write 632 Billion google hits and I wouldn't care) has fallen drastically with only a few scant mentions in the last days and generally in articles about the dead being found. Note that wikipedia is not a google results listing. Usrnme h8er (talk · contribs) 08:31, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I think we all agree that google hits aren't exact science; they are at best a rough indicator of relative notability. And in this case, we already know that, per multiple writeups in mainstream publications around the world, she is notable, so that's not at issue here. Google does seem to show us that she is more notable than the accident itself, which is logical and reasonable. Consider this non-Google point, which I mentioned above: French Minister Alain Joyandet said about Bakari: "In the midst of the mourning, there is Bahia. It is a miracle, it is an absolutely extraordinary battle for survival ... It's an enormous message that she sends to the world ... almost nothing is impossible." WP's role is to disseminate information. We can't properly present to the world her "enormous message" if it is stuck inside a sub-section of an accident article, which is focused by necessity on how and why the accident happened. Bakari's notability, given that she is the survivor of the deadliest ever sole survivor airline accident (as far as we know), and the only sole survivor ever of an ocean airliner crash (as far as we know), and given the persistent notability of other sole survivors, of less notable or deadly accidents, there is no reason her notability should significantly diminish from its current high. Crum375 (talk) 08:53, 9 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Merge to article about the event. Niteshift36 (talk) 05:28, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
 * If by "event" you mean the crash of flight 626, then it is far less notable than the "miracle girl" survivor. For example, Google for "flight 626" yields 16,300 hits, vs. 200,000+ for "bahia bakari". That's a factor of 10+ more notable for the survivor than the crash, if we use Google as a rough notability guide. Also, all other sole survivors of airline crashes have a separate wiki article, and this one is possibly the most notable of all of them, since its related crash is the deadliest single-survivor airline accident to date (going back to 1943 in ASN's database for 100+ fatality accidents). Can you explain your reasoning? Crum375 (talk) 07:40, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I could have sworn that I made a comment about the relevance of the number of Google hits earlier, but it seems to have disappeared. Once again Crum375, your reply to Niteshift36 is based purely on statistics. From WP:GOOGLEHITS:
 * Although using a search engine like Google can be useful in determining how common or well-known a particular topic is, a large number of hits on a search engine is no guarantee that the subject is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Similarly, a lack of search engine hits may only indicate that the topic is highly specialized or not generally sourceable via the internet.  One would not expect to find thousands of hits on an ancient Estonian god.  The search-engine test may, however, be useful as a negative test of popular culture topics which one would expect to see sourced via the Internet.  A search on an alleged "Internet meme" that returns only one or two distinct sources is a reasonable indication that the topic is not as notable as has been claimed.
 * Overall, the quality of the search engine results matters more than the raw number. A more detailed description of the problems that can be encountered using a search engine to determine suitability can be found here: Search engine test.
 * Whilst Google is a useful search engine for finding information, it is not our only criteria. It has not been around that long comparatively speaking, its algorithmns are not publicly known, it references blogs, fan sites, small ads sites, newspapers of varying quality, TV listings, reliable sources etc. indescriminately. Wikipedia is about quality and reliably sourced information, not amassing the sum of information available on the Internet. AlexandrDmitri (talk) 13:34, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree that relying on raw statistics can lead to false results. In this case, I only use Google results as a rough tool, to give us general ideas, vs. hand-waving and guesswork. Specifically, Google tells us that "bahia bakari" is more notable than "flight 626" (by a factor of 10 google-wise, but clearly that's not set in stone). It also tells us that "bahia bakari" is notable in general, almost twice as much as "john hinckley", the prototypical example of the BLP1E exception. But even if we leave Google and statistics aside, we still have numerous world wide mainstream references showing notability in general; we have a French government minister saying about Bakari: "In the midst of the mourning, there is Bahia. It is a miracle, it is an absolutely extraordinary battle for survival ... It's an enormous message that she sends to the world ... almost nothing is impossible." As I asked above, do we want to stifle that "enormous message", i.e. her incredible and unprecedented survival story, by sticking it in a small sub-section of an accident article, which is (correctly) focused on finding out how and why the accident occurred? Our subject is also the survivor of the deadliest sole-survivor airline crash ever, and the only one ever in the ocean (both to our knowledge: back to 1970 in general, to 1943 for over 100 fatalities). Notability of such "record holders" does not fade much over time, since the media keep revisiting the old ones and using them as reference points when new accidents occur, as they are doing in this case. So yes, I agree that statistics can be misleading, but in this case we have other, non-Google, direct criteria to establish notability and avoid BLP1E. Crum375 (talk) 14:25, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - To update the statistical record, I found a reliable source (the Guardian) which says that, per ASN, Bakari is a survivor of the second deadliest single-survivor airplane crash ever. According to the same ASN database, she is a survivor of the deadliest single-survivor ocean crash. Crum375 (talk) 03:29, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: That's all quite interesting and such, but it remains a fair margin beside the point. The point is, we do not know enough about her to have an article about her. What we do know is that she's quite young and "very, very shy"--two reasons, I would think, to make a presumption in favor of privacy. We also know that Bakari is known primarily for being a victim ("survivor" is one side of the coin; on the other side we have the sheer fact that she was in a plane crash, let alone the crash that killed her mother). In the link I just provided, we see a note on "dealing with individuals whose notability stems largely from their being victims of another's actions. Wikipedia editors must not act, intentionally or otherwise, in a way that amounts to participating in or prolonging the victimization." Admittedly, the letter of this passage does not make one think immediately of airplane crash survivors. But the spirit, I think, indicates that we should not shine too bright a spotlight on those who were forced onto the stage by factors mostly out of their control. If she ends up convincing the "audience" that her victimization somehow has made her less shy than her own father (who, incidentally, adds, "I can't say that it's a miracle") says she is, then perhaps she ought to have an article despite the WP:BLP precautions. Otherwise, this looks like a classic cause for BLP restraint. Cosmic Latte (talk) 17:37, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
 * We do know quite a bit more about her and her family, per reliable sources, but I opted to leave all those personal details out for BLP reasons. Per your proposed inclusion guideline, we'd need to delete most of our BLP articles. This subject is *extremely* notable, probably more than 99% of our BLP subjects, with reliable mainstream sources writing about her, some by first name ("Bahia, the miracle girl"). She is likely to remain notable for a lifetime, since she is a survivor of the deadliest sole-survivor airliner ocean crash, and second deadliest sole-survivor airplane crash, ever. These types of "records" confer lifetime notability, since the media keep rewriting about them when related events occur. Her survival story, a twelve year old girl being thrown out of a crashing airliner into the ocean, in pitch darkness, being unable to swim but surviving by holding on to bits of wreckage, in high seas, for over thirteen hours, is unprecedented in recorded survival stories. A French government minister says about her: "In the midst of the mourning, there is Bahia. It is a miracle, it is an absolutely extraordinary battle for survival ... It's an enormous message that she sends to the world ... almost nothing is impossible." He can clearly understand the immensity of her message, which will serve as inspiration of survivors for years to come. Wikipedia's role is to help spread human knowledge, not censor it (when done in a sensitive way to protect personal details). And sticking this information inside a sub-section in an accident article, which is necessarily focused on the hows and whys of the accident, is improper for both her as well as the accident article. As the survivor of the deadliest sole-survivor ocean crash with world wide notability, with an unprecedented ocean survival story, clearly she warrants her own article. Crum375 (talk) 18:27, 11 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep Not even the nominator wants to delete this article and so this discussion is a waste of time. AFD is for deletions only. If you want to discuss mergers then there are other processes for this. Colonel Warden (talk) 21:42, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: I would not have brought it here if I were not open to deletion. As far as I'm concerned, a consensus to delete at least 99% of all WP:BLP1E articles would be acceptable (although, of course, an umbrella nomination to that effect would not). My inclination to merge this article is minor, tentative, and mostly intuitive. My inclination to open it up to deletion, however, is strong in light of WP:BLP1E and WP:RECENTISM. Cosmic Latte (talk) 21:15, 12 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep Willing to keep at this moment - personally, I heard about the survivor before I heard about the crash. G-hits mean little, but his survivor's story does appear more covered than the crash itself ( talk→   BWilkins   ←track ) 10:24, 13 July 2009 (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.