Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Majuba Aviation 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   no consensus.  Sandstein  05:50, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Majuba Aviation crash

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This crash is not notable enough to warrant an article. It is just one more of thousands of instances of light aircraft crashing in poor weather. There has been no significant coverage, just a few news reports, which even in South Africa appear to have been identical in their wording. It does not meet WP:GNG, fails under WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENT, and does not meet WP:AIRCRASH either. It has been suggested elsewhere that notability might have been conferred by the number of deaths, but I do not agree - nowhere is it stated that number of deaths is an inclusion criterion. YSSYguy (talk) 23:52, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - as a light aircraft, the inclusion requirements are a bit more strict than with other aviation accident articles. While one might argue that the death count, and the identity of one of the victims as the CEO of Italtile Ltd, it must be considered that the company itself, Italtile, is not notable enough to merit its own article (it's a South African tile, ceramic, and bath accessory import/export company.) Additionally the accident does not meet WP:RS standards -- the few articles that mention the crash are either verbatim copies of the same wire story, or focus entirely on the CEO of Italtile and possible successors. As the cause of the accident was ATC error rather than any form of terrorism, malfunctioning hardware, or negligence, there is little hope that the incident will gain notability over time. Moreso than the inability to find reliable secondary sources, the incident and article completely fail to establish long-term notability per WP:EVENT. -- Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû (blah?) 01:43, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment You seem to be basing your opinion that Italtile is not a notable company on the fact that there is no article about it here on WP yet - that is circular reasoning. Italtile is a large company in South Africa and IMHO would easily meet WP:CORP. This incident would best fit as a section in such an article rather than as a stand alone article. The aircraft operator itself is a subsidiary of Italtile anyway - Majuba Aviation is simply Italtile's company plane operating division. It is not a separate entity such as an airline or charter operator. Roger (talk) 08:46, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Actually my opinion is based on the fact that the event clearly does not yet meet notability requirements, or show any long-term notability per WP:EVENT, and most importantly the fact that it's clearly lacking reliable secondary sources (WP:RS). The Italtile notability (or not, whatever it may be) is just a side note, and additional contributor, IMO, to a delete argument. -- Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû (blah?) 17:34, 14 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment, although under 5,700kg, the PC-12 is not exactly a "light aircraft". Although not a RS itself, the ASN Wikibase entry has links to seven RS web articles covering the crash. Mjroots (talk) 07:23, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment They're all essentially the same article and rehash the same information. The ones that still exist on the internets that is. -- Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû (blah?) 17:34, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

*Request, If the result of this AFD is to delete, I would like to have the content of the article "sandboxed" under my user page as I intend to create an article for Italtile in the near future - which would be the "natural" home for the information about this incident. I'm not sure how such a move to userspace is done so I would apreciate some advice/assistance. Roger (talk) 08:46, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I take over that request. --KzKrann (talk) 21:19, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Why - so you can try to sneak it back in later, the way you did with ACE Flight 22 last week?
 * That won't happen. If an article on Italtile is created, and the accident is covered as a section of Italtile, the current title can redirect to that section. If this is done, then I will protect the redirect from editing by anyone who is not an admin, thus preventing recreation of the article against consensus. Mjroots (talk) 07:36, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Which I've done with Alaska Central Express Flight 22 and ACE Flight 22. KzKrann, you need to learn that sometimes consensus is against you. When it is, you need to accept the fact with good grace (or put another way, you can't win 'em all). Mjroots (talk) 07:45, 19 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep - Commercial flight, 9 people died, and Air Traffic Control errors are pretty rare. --KzKrann (talk) 20:17, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment, Not a "commercial flight" in the sense of a airline or even a charter flight. It's the company's own plane transporting the company's own executives and some other business associates - not fare-paying passengers. There is no credible source of any evidence of ATC error. The accident investigation report has not yet been published. Roger (talk) 20:26, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * 9 people died, that's enough for me. --KzKrann (talk) 11:36, 17 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of South Africa-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:22, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:22, 14 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete as per nom and User:Mukkakukaku's reasoning. - SudoGhost (talk) 02:50, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep 9 died, nuff said. And if its atc its notable Mirriam3333 (talk) 12:12, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment WP:AIRCRAFT states that light aircraft crashes are much more common, so the number of deaths does not equal notability on its own. - SudoGhost (talk) 21:29, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment As has been pointed out already, there is no evidence presented that there was any ATC error - I think WP:SYNTH might be involved as far as that statement goes. As has also been pointed out, number of deaths does not confer notability. Also, the PC-12 has a MTOW of less than 5,700kg so is by definition a light aircraft. YSSYguy (talk) 22:50, 18 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep I consider that number of deaths does make for notability, The Aviation project may think otherwise, but they are in my opinion thinking about what makes things notable to aircraft enthusiasts, not the general public. I agree that what makes things notable to specialists is notable, but they may not realize that what the rest of the world has its own ideas about what makes things notable. For them, I think the primary factor is number of fatalities, or notable people killed, or those in a special group. Project guidelines are valid only to the extent the general consensus agrees that they are--we are not a group of specialized encyclopedias  but a single Wikipedia.  DGG ( talk ) 18:23, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment So where does your "death notability threshold" lie - six deaths? Seven? Eight? Is it nine? Does it apply to events like a ferry sinking in Indonesia, or a bus crash in Kenya, or a sixty-car pile-up on an autobahn in Germany? Do those sorts of events have a different "death notability threshold"? YSSYguy (talk) 20:55, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Whenever an aircraft crashes and there is a single death this is sufficient for WP:AIRCRASH. The exception to this is light aircraft (which applies to this situation).  The reasoning for this is that "light aircraft account for many more accidents and incidents than larger aircraft, most of which are non-notable."  I believe that a light aircraft crashing with casualties is not notable to the general public, as it is a much more common occurrence.  - SudoGhost (talk) 20:57, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment there do not have to be any deaths for an incident to be notable. If there are deaths, a greater number of deaths adds more weight to the case for notability, but does not guarantee notability. Mjroots (talk) 04:33, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment I don't believe anyone said otherwise. One of the possible criteria for aircraft crashes is if it was fatal.  That's the one we're discussing, not the other criteria, as the number of deaths was the criteria used in  DGG's reasoning for notability. - SudoGhost (talk) 04:51, 21 April 2011 (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.