Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/National Airlines Flight 84


 * 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. No consensus for a particular action is evident in this discussion. North America1000 22:27, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

National Airlines Flight 84

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is not such a straightforward case. This newly-created article is largely an improperly-done copy-and-paste of the content in the Frankie Housley article, complete with old access dates for references, some of which are now dead links. It is also the wrong name (possibly deliberately but in good faith, considering the inexperience of the article's creator), with National Airlines Flight 83 (the correct flight number) existing as a redirect for several years. It seems to me that any notability rests with the flight attendant Frankie Housley and her actions during the aftermath of the crash, rather than the crash itself; and the crash is adequately covered in the article about her. Even if the crash itself is judged to be notable and worth a stand-alone article, I can't help thinking that it is better to start again by expanding from the redirect with new prose and newly-accessed sources than to persist with renaming this article over the top of the redirect and cleaning it up. YSSYguy (talk) 05:32, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 07:22, 30 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep and improve. Of course, a commercial airline plane crash that killed seven people and destroyed the plane is notable and deserves an article. Frankie Housley is also notable, and two related articles are appropriate in this case. Every problem identified by the nominator can be fixed easily through normal editing and a move over the redirect to the correct title. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  07:55, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Why "of course"? If one article adequately covers a subject, why would we have another one about the same subject? YSSYguy (talk) 08:55, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
 * The crash article should have more detail about the causes of the crash, the pilot and co-pilot, other casualties, rescue efforts, the investigation, any safety changes made as a result. The Housely article should have more biographical details about her life.


 * Comment: WP:ONEEVENT indicates that we should not have two articles on the same subject, a biography Frankie Housley and an event article. Normally in these circumstances, where the person is famous for just one event, we would keep the event article and redirect the bio article to the event. Editors need to think carefully about which of the two articles should be kept. - Ahunt (talk) 12:25, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
 * A quote from WP:ONEEVENT: " The general rule in many cases is to cover the event, not the person. However, if media coverage of both the event and the individual's role grow larger, separate articles may become justified." Cullen328  Let's discuss it  03:01, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Quite true, that is what it does say, but it doesn't apply here. It was a single event that involves the person and the event itself. There is little justification in this case for two articles on the same subject. I say we pick one and redirect the other. - Ahunt (talk) 12:33, 31 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete or merge into Frankie Housley. While tragic, this is just a news event and Wikipedia is not a newspaper.--Rpclod (talk) 18:16, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep - both the accident and person are notable. It is perfectly reasonable to have articles on both - e.g. Neerja Bhanot / Pan Am Flight 73 and Barbara Jane Harrison / BOAC Flight 712. Mjroots (talk) 13:01, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Merge The event is notable in its own right, but the person would NOT have been notable without the event. So the event article should lead and the person article should be merged into it with a re-direct!!--Petebutt (talk) 00:29, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
 * The significant ongoing coverage about this event is about Frankie Housley, not the crash itself; so the article to keep is the one about her. Logic and WP policy mean that the answer is not to move this copy-and-paste with an incorrect name over the existing redirect; but to delete this, clean up/expand the Frankie Housley article and then change the Flight 83 redirects' target to Frankie Housley. Then we have one article covering one event, with the focus correctly on Housley, because it is her that has received the ongoing significant coverage more than fifty years later; the crash itself is only listed in air crash databases. YSSYguy (talk) 05:42, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   15:40, 7 November 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:48, 15 November 2016 (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.