Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/United Airlines Flight 955


 * 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   delete. —Tom Morris (talk) 00:55, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

United Airlines Flight 955

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Doesn't meet WP:Aircrash criteria for a stand alone article.William 17:13, 23 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions.  -William 17:16, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions.  -William 17:16, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.  -William 17:16, 23 January 2012 (UTC)


 * wp:So fix it. The cited investigation report gives plenty of useful source material. It verifies that the manufacturer changed the aircraft design based on the investigation's findings to improve containment. The FAA's chronic foot dragging on AWDs to extant fleets of domestic design is no reason to delete the article.LeadSongDog come howl!  18:09, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
 * There is nothing to fix. See below. - The Bushranger One ping only 08:33, 28 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. The occurrence isn't even mentioned in Aviation Safety Network.--Jetstreamer (talk) 14:48, 25 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. While it meets WP:AIRCRASH, that is for inclusion in the Boeing 777 or United Airlines articles, it fails to meet the WP:GNG for a stand-alone article (as specified by the appropriate section of WP:AIRCRASH). The information, if desired in one or both of those articles, can be added there - there is no need for a redirect. - The Bushranger One ping only 08:33, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete not that significant that it justifies a stand-alone article. MilborneOne (talk) 20:44, 28 January 2012 (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.