Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tibet Airlines Flight 9833


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. I can see a clear consensus that this article has sufficient lasting coverage and passes WP:NEVENT. (non-admin closure)  Coco bb8  (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 14:57, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Tibet Airlines Flight 9833

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Non-notable accident. No sustained continued coverage, no lasting effects have been demonstrated and no in-depth coverage generated from the accident. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 14:48, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Aviation,  and China. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 14:52, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Strong keep There is clearly lasting coverage – simply search "关于2022年5月12日西藏航空TV9833航班偏出跑道事故相关处理（处罚）情况的通报" and you will find several articles on the recently-released report by the CAAC, like this one . Keep in mind that news sourcing in China is already sparse to begin with. This coverage is far beyond what I would expect for notability. Toadspike   [Talk]  07:43, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I have now added the information from that source/the CAAC report to the article. It is source ten, in the last paragraph. Toadspike   [Talk]  08:03, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
 * My argument still stands. There is clearly not sustained continued coverage, news reports only appeared because the final report was released. There was practically barely any coverage whatsoever of the accident between when the accident happened and the release of the final report other than announcements by the CAAC. I can't find any lasting effects that have been generated by this accident and fining those related/involved in the accident certainly won't help develop the aviation industry. Reading the safety recommendations from a translated version of the Final Report, the recommendations don't seem to be that significant in regards to improvement in the long term. In my opinion, the accident isn't particularly noteworthy in itself. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 15:29, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I understand your concerns. My view of sustained, continued coverage seems to differ from yours. To me, having several news articles about the event over two years is a sufficiently significant period of time (sustained), and is not a burst or spike of news reports (there were several such "bursts") or an event only covered in sources published during or immediately after an event, without further analysis or discussion (continued).
 * Separately, I must re-emphasize the point that this is a country with barely any news reporting to begin with, especially of disasters and tragedies. And you can bet that there will be lasting effects, we just won't see them, since they'll be implemented behind-the-scenes by some mid-level official doing his best to enforce national policy and prevent future embarrassment. I am much less concerned with recentism here than I am with geographic bias. Toadspike   [Talk]  09:39, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
 * While geographic bias may play a factor in the amount of international news coverage, that does not mean there can't be any (excluding chinese news coverage). The article had multiple international news agencies covering this on the day of the accident (none after the accident).
 * Another issue regarding this article is that most if not all news coverage regarding this accident consist of primary sources with barely any secondary sources available. Most sources only covered the topic when the accident happened and when the CAAC published their announcements which certainly is in the realm of WP:NOTNEWS.
 * When taking a look at the sources given when typing "关于2022年5月12日西藏航空TV9833航班偏出跑道事故相关处理（处罚）情况的通报", it's clear that news coverage regarding the release of the final report only repeat what was stated by the CAAC in its final report with no real analysis.
 * Whilst there may be lasting effects, the recommendations given don't seem to be particularly impressive such as "cockpit tidiness". Whilst aviation safety cannot be perfect, most of these recommendations should've long been implemented such as better CRM training. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:33, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Keep. The event meets Notability (events) in that it has received significant coverage in 2022, 2023, and 2024 even years after it took place on 12 May 2022. The event is notable since the seventh edition of the McGraw Hill Education book Commercial Aviation Safety noted, "The second incident involved a Tibet Airlines Flight 9833, which overran the runway before catching fire and injuring 36 of the 122 passengers. The CAAC (Civil Aviation Administration of China) has now announced a far-reaching reform of the whole of the Chinese aviation system to address this lapse in safety performance" (WP:LASTING) and it has continued to receive sustained coverage years after the event (WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE), even if those sources were prompted by the final report. If the event were non-notable, it would not continue to receive significant coverage years later. Sources published from the day of to two years after the event (ordered chronologically) that provide significant coverage about Tibet Airlines Flight 9833:   The article notes: "China suffered a second aircraft disaster in as many months on Thursday, when a Tibet Airlines plane burst into flames after veering off the runway during takeoff. Videos posted online appears to show the front of the Airbus A319 engulfed in flames as passengers flee from the aircraft. Over 40 people were reportedly taken to hospital, with minor injuries. There have been no fatalities reported from the 119 passengers and nine crew members on-board. ... The A319 is one of Airbus’s smaller models and the plane that caught fire on Thursday was nine years old, Reuters says. An isolated incident like the “abnormality” at Chongqing airport will unlikely affect Airbus’s broader operations. Airbus’s London-based shares have yet to react to the news."   The article notes: "Crew members noticed that fuel oil was leaking and started evacuating passengers down slides, Mr A said. Fire soon broke out, forcing some passengers including himself to jump from the aircraft, he said, adding that he had injured his back and legs. Unverified photos on social media show both engines separated from the airframe as well as a major crack in the rear fuselage and damage to the right wing. The plane involved is a nine-year-old A319, one of the smallest versions of the A320 family."   The article notes: "Images shared by Chinese state media showed flames engulfing the side of the stricken jet as terrified passengers ran from the scene. Photos of the aftermath showed scorch marks covering the nose and one wing of the jet, which had been doused in water to control the blaze. ... Flight TV9833 deviated from the runway during take-off and “the left side of the aircraft’s nose caught fire”, Chongqing Jiangbei International Airport said in a separate statement."   The article notes: "More than 40 people were taken to the hospital after a Tibet Airlines plane burst into flames after veering off the runway during takeoff at China’s Chongqing Airport. The front of the Airbus SE A319 aircraft was engulfed in flames and enveloped by thick black smoke, footage posted on social media showed. Passengers carrying bags and other items were seen on the tarmac running away from the burning jet."   The article notes: "On Thursday, May, 12, a Tibet Airlines plane caught fire after veering off the airport runway in Chongqing, China. The plane was departing from the city of Chongqing, China, to Nyingchi, Tibet, carrying 113 passengers and nine crew members, when the crew noticed “abnormalities” and suspended take off before the plane caught fire."   The book provides two sentences of coverage about the subject. notes: "The second incident involved a Tibet Airlines Flight 9833, which overran the runway before catching fire and injuring 36 of the 122 passengers. The CAAC has now announced a far-reaching reform of the whole of the Chinese aviation system to address this lapse in safety performance." </li> <li> The article notes: "2022年5月12日，西藏航空有限公司空客A319-115型客机(注册号B-6425)执行TV9833重庆至林芝国内定期客运航班，在重庆江北机场03号跑道起飞滑跑过程中偏出跑道. 机上旅客113人、机组9人全部安全撤离，飞机及机场地面设施不同程度受损. " From Google Translate: "On 12 May 2022, Tibet Airlines Co., Ltd. Airbus A319-115 passenger aircraft (registration number B-6425) carried out TV9833 Chongqing to Linzhi domestic scheduled passenger flight, and deviated from the runway during the takeoff runway 03 of Chongqing Jiangbei Airport. All 113 passengers and 9 crew members on board were safely evacuated, and the aircraft and airport ground facilities were damaged to varying degrees." </li> <li> The article notes: "据悉，2022年5月12日8时09分，西藏航空TV9833航班（重庆至林芝）在重庆江北国际机场起飞时偏出跑道，航空器机头左侧起火. " From Google Translate: "It is reported that at 8:09 on May 12, 2022, Tibet Airlines TV9833 flight (Chongqing to Linzhi) deviated from the runway when taking off at Chongqing Jiangbei International Airport, and the left side of the aircraft nose caught fire." </li> <li> The article notes: "国内三大航一名飞行员告诉南都记者，客机起飞前机长会做绕机检查，遇到需要中断起飞的情况“很罕见”. 他同时指出，如果飞机带着起落架或轮子故障起飞，“回头再落地会更麻烦，损伤会更严重”.  事发当日下午，西藏航空有限公司重庆营业部告诉南都记者，飞机上的轻伤旅客安排在医院治疗，大部分乘客则安排到酒店住宿，会保障他们后续的出行安排，事故原因正在调查中. "  From Google Translate: "A pilot from one of the three major domestic airlines told Nandu reporters that the captain would do a circumnavigation inspection before the passenger plane took off, and it was "very rare" to encounter a situation where the takeoff needed to be aborted. He also pointed out that if the plane took off with a landing gear or wheel failure, "it would be more troublesome to turn around and land again, and the damage would be more serious."  On the afternoon of the incident, the Chongqing Sales Department of Tibet Airlines Co., Ltd. told Nandu reporters that the slightly injured passengers on the plane were arranged for treatment in the hospital, and most of the passengers were arranged to stay in hotels, and their subsequent travel arrangements would be guaranteed. The cause of the accident is under investigation. </li> <li> The article notes: "澎湃新闻此前报道，2022年5月12日，西藏航空TV9833航班在执行重庆—林芝客运任务时，在重庆机场起飞滑跑过程中偏出跑道. 根据机组反映，飞机在起飞过程中出现异常，按程序中断起飞，偏出跑道后发动机擦地起火，目前已扑灭. 机上共计122人，其中旅客113人，机组9人，已全部安全撤离. 在撤离过程中，有36人擦伤扭伤，已及时送当地医院检查. 该起事故事发一年后，胡磊向中国民用航空西南地区管理局（下称：民航西南局）申请政府信息公开，要求公开该起不安全事件的调查进展情况（周年报告）. " From Google Translate: "The Paper previously reported that on May 12, 2022, Tibet Airlines TV9833 flight deviated from the runway during takeoff at Chongqing Airport while performing the Chongqing-Linzhi passenger transport mission. According to the crew, the aircraft had an abnormality during takeoff and interrupted takeoff according to the procedure. After deviating from the runway, the engine rubbed the ground and caught fire, which has been extinguished. There were 122 people on board, including 113 passengers and 9 crew members, all of whom have been safely evacuated. During the evacuation, 36 people were bruised and sprained and were promptly sent to local hospitals for examination. One year after the incident, Hu Lei applied to the Southwest Regional Administration of the Civil Aviation Administration of China (hereinafter referred to as the Southwest Regional Administration of Civil Aviation) for government information disclosure, requesting the disclosure of the investigation progress of the unsafe incident (annual report)." </li> <li> The article notes: "经调查，2022年5月12日西藏航空TV9833航班偏出跑道事故是一起机组处置失误导致的运输航空一般事故. 民航西南地区管理局按照相关法律、法规及规章，已对西藏航空公司及相关人员作出如下行政处理（处罚）决定：" From Google Translate: "After investigation, the runway deflection accident of Tibet Airlines TV9833 Flight on May 12, 2022 was a general transport aviation accident caused by crew handling errors. In accordance with relevant laws, regulations and rules, the Southwest Regional Administration of Civil Aviation has made the following administrative handling (punishment) decisions on Tibet Airlines and related personnel:" </li> </ol>There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Tibet Airlines Flight 9833 to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 08:26, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Sources 1-5 are all sources from the first week after the accident happened.
 * "The second incident involved a Tibet Airlines Flight 9833, which overran the runway before catching fire and injuring 36 of the 122 passengers. The CAAC (Civil Aviation Administration of China) has now announced a far-reaching reform of the whole of the Chinese aviation system to address this lapse in safety performance"
 * I am unable to find evidence of a far-reaching reform of the whole of the Chinese aviation system to address this lapse in safety performance.
 * Additionally, two sentences from a source is not enough to establish notability. Just because this accident was the second of its kind involving Tibet Airlines doesn't mean much unless something gives the accident some sort of notability.
 * Regarding the Chinese sources that you provided, saying they are independant is quite a stretch.
 * The CAAC's parent agency is the Ministry of Transport which is a constituent department of the Chinese State Council.
 * China Central Television is owned by the Publicity Department of the Chinese Communist Party whose parent company, China Media Group, is owned by both the Publicity Department of the Chinese Communist Party and the State Council of the People's Republic of China.
 * China News Service is owned by the United Front Work Department of the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party.
 * Whilst I'm a bit unsure about this one, from what I can tell, Chongqing Hualong is affiliated with Chongqing Daily Newspaper Group which is the official newspaper of the Chongqing Municipal Committee of the Chinese Communist Party
 * Southern Metropolis Daily is a constituent/owned by the Nanfang Media Group which in turn is under the supervision of the Guangdong Provincial Committee of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
 * The Paper is owned by Shanghai United Media Group which in turn is owned and overseen by the Shanghai Municipal Committee of the Chinese Communist Party.
 * Obviously, it cannot be expected that there will be independent newspapers in China but this does mean that the reliability of these sources can be questioned. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 11:12, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
 * China News Service is owned by the United Front Work Department of the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party.
 * Whilst I'm a bit unsure about this one, from what I can tell, Chongqing Hualong is affiliated with Chongqing Daily Newspaper Group which is the official newspaper of the Chongqing Municipal Committee of the Chinese Communist Party
 * Southern Metropolis Daily is a constituent/owned by the Nanfang Media Group which in turn is under the supervision of the Guangdong Provincial Committee of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
 * The Paper is owned by Shanghai United Media Group which in turn is owned and overseen by the Shanghai Municipal Committee of the Chinese Communist Party.
 * Obviously, it cannot be expected that there will be independent newspapers in China but this does mean that the reliability of these sources can be questioned. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 11:12, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
 * The Paper is owned by Shanghai United Media Group which in turn is owned and overseen by the Shanghai Municipal Committee of the Chinese Communist Party.
 * Obviously, it cannot be expected that there will be independent newspapers in China but this does mean that the reliability of these sources can be questioned. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 11:12, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Obviously, it cannot be expected that there will be independent newspapers in China but this does mean that the reliability of these sources can be questioned. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 11:12, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Obviously, it cannot be expected that there will be independent newspapers in China but this does mean that the reliability of these sources can be questioned. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 11:12, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

</li></ul>


 * Keep. Two years of detailed coverage is sustained coverage. PARAKANYAA (talk) 10:15, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Detailed coverage is quite a stretch. There isn't any coverage regarding some sort of (re)analysis of the accident. Most sources only repeat what was said by the CAAC and only stop there. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 11:22, 9 June 2024 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.