Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EgyptAir Flight 763


 * 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. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 17:54, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

EgyptAir Flight 763

 * – ( View AfD View log ) •

Contested Prod. Largely non-notable plane crash with no significant coverage that goes beyond simply reporting on the story. Suggest deletion per WP:NOTNEWS K orr u ski Talk 09:28, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep. I doubt WP:NOTNEWS applies to a crash that happened in 1972 - but WP:AIRCRASH does - and this crash could possibly qualify under L3: Country, nation, etc - the deadliest or most significant accident to take place in a country, nation, or major (typically 1st-level) sub-national area. If it is the deadliest airline crash in Yemen ever, make it a strong keep. - The Bushranger Return fire Flank speed 10:10, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Fair point on WP:NOTNEWS - but there's no source to suggest that it is the deadliest crash and, indeed, even the article only claims that it is 'one of the' deadliest. I just don't see any evidence of notability.-- K orr u ski Talk 10:20, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment This article was one of several created by User:Ryan kirkpatrick in Jaunary 2010, and the user was blocked in June 2010 as a sockpuppet of an abusive user, and has operated other sock accounts into Novemeber 2010. Several of the other articles are of this type - very short, with no sources beyond the Air Safety Network database. While the events appear to be genuine, We probaly ought to investigate all of the article this user and his socks have created, and see if any of them are genuinely notable. - BilCat (talk) 11:24, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Middle East-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 13:18, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 13:18, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Unless someone can find sources with significantly more detail than in the article at the moment, then Merge to Egyptair or Inex Adria (from whom the aircraft was chartered.Nigel Ish (talk) 18:30, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - this was the second worst accident in Yemen to date, and worst civil airliner crash in Yemen. Mjroots (talk) 20:04, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - I've turned up some more sources, but nothing extensive yet. It's quite plausible that the best sources on this are not in English. Has anyone checked for sources from Egypt, Yemen, or Yugoslavia? Despite being a US-built a/c, there's no record of an investigation at the FAA or the NTSB databases. Perhaps Yemen wasn't a Chicago signatory in 1972? It seems improbable in the extreme that there is no substantive record on an accident with 30 fatalities. LeadSongDog  come howl!  20:19, 26 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: The article under discussion here has been flagged for rescue by the Article Rescue Squadron.  Snotty Wong   spill the beans 16:42, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - It's going to be harder to find sources for something that happened in 1972, however I can't see how a plane crash where everyone dies is not going to be notable in some way. Especially a plane crash which is the #1 or #2 deadliest crash in a particular country.  Snotty Wong   spill the beans 16:42, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. The sources cited in the article include two books published decades after the event, so lasting notability beyond news reports has been demonstrated. Phil Bridger (talk) 22:43, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Note that one of the book sources (the SAS one) appears to be used to cite that the mountain that the aircraft hit was a volcano, while the other book source isn't actually cited, so it isn't clear what depth of coverage it gives to the accident.Nigel Ish (talk) 23:18, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * LeadSongDog added the book ref. Perhaps he could correctly reference the relevant piece of info using cite book? Mjroots (talk) 09:28, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I find it hard to believe that a book about the SAS can have much to contribute in terms of demonstrating the notability of this crash but it would be interested to see in what respect it is mentioned. I shall see if I can find a copy.-- K orr u ski Talk 10:54, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I was referring to the addition of Encyclopedia of African Airlines, which would seem to be a relevant source. Mjroots (talk) 13:06, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * So you were, I apologise. It was just that the comment you responded to was about the SAS book. It's hard to be sure without a copy, but to me it seems highly probable that the Encyclopedia of African Airlines will just have an article about EgyptAir, which would mention this event as part of it. In my view, that would not be enough to establish notability. Actually, it might suggest that we ought to treat the event in a similar fashion, with a merge.-- K orr u ski Talk 16:20, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok, I think that's straightened out now. The SAS was just one possible choice to support the statement that Krater is an extinct volcano. I could have used Sir Richard Burton too, but that's a bit dated:-) The Encyclopedia of African Airlines ref is now linked to the source page. It supports many of the details. Now then, can anybody clarify who was the responisible body for leading an investigation back then? LeadSongDog come howl!  00:34, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * The current authority is the Yemen Civil Aviation Authority, so maybe it was the South Yemen Civil Aviation Authority back then. Mjroots (talk) 08:08, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Found the Civil Aviation and Meteorological Authority of Yemen, but the site seems to be much form with little content.LeadSongDog come howl!  14:29, 2 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep There is quite a bit of coverage. It was a major plane crash in 1972. -- Alpha Quadrant   talk    05:11, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * But isn't this where WP:NOTNEWS comes in? Something that was a major event in 1972 and attracted coverage at the time is not necessarily still notable. It does seem that the community disagrees with me on this one, so perhaps I'm wrong.-- K orr u ski Talk 10:54, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Notability does not diminish with time. If it was notable then, it's notable now. - The Bushranger Return fire Flank speed 18:53, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keyword being 'if'. Considering this happened in 1972, the accepted way to prove it 'was notable then' in 2010, is to show it meets WP:EVENT, not to claim that the news coverage it probably got at the time would theoretically have passed an Afd had Wikipedia existed back then. MickMacNee (talk) 20:52, 30 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete, unless or until sources are added to show how this aircrash article definitively meets WP:EVENT. While I am sympathetic to the fact that CSB issues arise due to the location, I am also acutely aware of how many people are blindly asserting at Afd right now that more recent crashes will 'obviously'/'clearly' be notable given the passage of time. Well, we have a test case here. Is all that just hot air, or can they actually back up their assertions with some real evidence? Time passing or not being able to access sources is no excuse - if that is all that is holding up the process, then per standard Wikipedia development practices, the article should be deleted/userfied, unless or until such time as they can be located and a proper article can be written, establishing notability from the moment it enters the article space. MickMacNee (talk) 21:11, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * That's pretty clearly wp:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. While in 2010 few publications truly become obscured by time, that cannot be said about 1972. As South Yemen was on the other side during the Cold War, they likely were not cooperative with western (particularly US) aviation safety agencies. We shouldn't be surprised that we have a little more digging to do to build an article. Keep in mind that "Hard cases make bad law". This shouldn't be taken as any kind of precedent.LeadSongDog come howl!  00:34, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Like I said, I would normally be sympathetic to CSB issues, if it wasn't for the total hypocrisy that has surrounded aircrash Afd's recently about what is and isn't 'clearly notable', such that no unbiased observer can be sure any more if these articles are being properly measured against actual evidence, or just being waved through Afd because they were aircrashes, and of course, in the view of the people doing the waving, all fatal aircrashes are always notable irrespective of size, location, plane, lasting impact, or anything else, making assertions like 'biggest in Yemen' in Afd's like this, completely and utterly meaningless. The fact this happened behind the Iron Curtain is irrelevant, we have terrabytes of material on incidents behind the curtain, because they actualy meet EVENT, because they actualy were notable, in the true sense, not the vague wave GNG sense being used for all the Western crashes (which is the real source of most SB issues on the pedia - elevating articles based on routine news junk in the Western world to the level of importance of what would make the standard of the encyclopoedic record elsewhere in the world). You want more time to do more digging on this article? Fine. Just don't use the Main Space as a development area. I'll vote on any article you might come up with after digging, using EVENT, as is perfeclty normal Wikipedia article develpopment practice. MickMacNee (talk) 15:37, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I might point out that 'biggest in Yemen' is not an assertion; it's a verified fact. - The Bushranger Return fire Flank speed 13:57, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I meant to say, "making assertions of notability like 'biggest in Yemen'." MickMacNee (talk) 14:34, 2 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep 30 dead people, crashed airliner & the worst crash in Yemen. though I am not surprised that the english language coverage of this crash is less than what would have been the case had this happened in US.  that is the origin of systemic bias on wp.--Wikireader41 (talk) 01:37, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak keep seems like a notable event in a country... good sources... consider merging if there's nothing to add... Arskwad (talk) 23:36, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak keep would want to see better sources but I think we've got enough coverage by independent sources to establish notability. Something more in the same vein as the Flight article, rather than just an entry from some aviation incident database, would be very helpful. bobrayner (talk) 05:00, 3 December 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.