Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Graham Hill 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 keep. (non-admin closure) ! dave  12:33, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Graham Hill plane crash

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No independently notable. Whatever can be mentioned about this accident can be mentioned on the articles of the notable passengers. Tvx1 16:02, 25 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep - I can see where you are coming from, but although this accident is principally notable because of Hill's death the incident itself gets plenty of independent coverage that isn't rolled up into a general article on Hill, and the deaths of the others and subsequent effect on the team do lend some degree of added profile. The article itself is already a good one, and worthwhile, and given the length of Hill's own article to include all of that information there (including maintenance logs and pilot registrations, etc.) would be overkill for this one event in his life; Hill is known for being a twice World Champion, not for dying in a plane crash. In addition, would we then have the Tony Brise page directing people to Hill's page for details of his death; a very odd and somewhat disrespectful way of handling things I feel. I agree that this article needs a better and more descriptive name (1975 Arkley Piper Aztec crash would be my vote) but it does serve a useful purpose as a standalone. This is similar to how the 2008 Biggin Hill Cessna Citation crash is used by the Richard Lloyd (racing driver) and David Leslie (racing driver) articles. In summary, I think the article as it stands is a useful addition to this encyclopedia, is a convenient neutral place to justifiably expand on the deaths of six people (two of whom have Wikipedia articles), and doesn't detract or get in the way of people wanting the more important information about Hill and Brise at their own pages. Pyrop  e  16:24, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
 * It's all true, but it doesn't change the fact the accident isn't independently notable. It's just a crash of a private plane during landing in averse conditions. This literally has happened dozens of times in the history of aviation. It's not a major accident in any way and didn't not have any major impact on the airline industry. If Hill hadn't been flying and thus killing himself no-one would care about this crash of an Arkley Piper Aztec. If would be just one of many that happen throughout the years. It's not notable independent of Hill and the other passengers and therefore everything important can be covered in their articles. Of course information about the event can be mentioned on Brise's article as well.Tvx1 18:01, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
 * And if your uncle was a woman she'd be your aunt. The fact is that Hill was killed and there has been a lot of media and authorly interest in the accident itself because of that. At Wikipedia we call this interest 'notability', and we measure it (for want of a better word) by looking for significant coverage of the article subject in respected third-party sources. Lots of this exists for this incident, appearing in national newspapers, magazines, news organizations, and books, amongst other places. They all deal with the accident as a primary topic, therefore this topic passes WP:GNG quite easily, as others have mentioned below. You are flogging a dead horse here. Pyrop  e  19:42, 25 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep - It meets WP:GNG easily and is a topic of interest in itself, beyond the bio details. If this were rolled into the bio article much relevant detail would be lost. - Ahunt (talk) 16:46, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Wrong. All relevant detail can be copied.Tvx1 18:01, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: Notification of the existence of this AfD has been made at WikiProject Aviation and WikiProject Aircraft, within whose scope this article falls. - Ahunt (talk) 16:49, 25 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Snow Keep: The crash has received significant enough coverage to warrant pulling all the material together in one article. &mdash; Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 17:26, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Calling for a snow close barely an hour after an AFD was initiated doesn't demonstrate much respect. Give people some time to contribute. There is a good reason why an AFD has a general running time of seven days.Tvx1 18:01, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
 * This editor who (If you asked around) has a reputation as a STRONG aviation accident deletionist says Keep below. Why? It has been the established consensus that any aviation accident article where someone wikipedia notable person died is a keep. This AFD was going the same way as this one (and after barely six hours) when the nominator withdrew the nomination. Steelpillow's call for a snow is a good call. If this AFD continues, who is the editor not showing respect?...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 18:28, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Realism borne of experience is not always respectful of dead horses. There is also a good reason why WP:SNOW exists and my view has already been echoed twice. Please stay on-topic here and raise any further concerns over my conduct on my talk page. &mdash; Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 19:34, 25 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep The accident was not just noteworthy for death of Hill (and Brise) but a lot of fuss at the time about unregistered aircraft and iffy pilot licence and some rather bad decision makings. Some of this makes the accident of note as well as having two wiki notable deaths. MilborneOne (talk) 17:30, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Any aviation accident article where a WP notable dies is an automatic keep. I also second Steepillow's motion for a snow closure. This article isn't going anywhere....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 17:47, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Snow keep - not only did this accident result in the deaths of two wikinotable people, the Embassy Hill has two redlinks, Ray Brimble and Andy Smallman. Thus that is potentially four articles. There is no point in duplicating the info over these articles and that on the team, when it can all be kept in one handy place. Mjroots (talk) 18:24, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep I don't agree with the premise, but any crash with a notable person has been deemed, itself, notable in the eyes of the community. By the way, what is with the "oppose" !votes? We are not voting on an ITN entry or village pump proposal.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 18:26, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I've changed the "opposes" to "keeps" per the convention for !voting in AfD's. Mjroots (talk) 18:45, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. I've always thought that as the title of this discussion board is "Articles for deletion", the appropriate opinions (not votes...) to express were either for or against the proposal inherent in the listing! Pyrop  e  19:34, 25 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep - Big hole in your logic, if the crash had notable passengers, it most likely be notable. -  ZLEA  (Talk, Contribs) 21:34, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep – It's an established practice that air accidents where notable people died are covered in dedicated articles (see John Jhon Kennedy, Aaliyah, Buddy Holly and others), and for a good reason: they won't fit in the related biography, involve more than one notable person or simply how and why someone notable has died deserves specific, in-depth coverage. --Deeday-UK (talk) 00:44, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep – For exactly the same reasons that Deeday-UK gave above. - Samf4u (talk) 00:40, 27 January 2018 (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.