Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scandinavian Airlines Flight 2748

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 --Haemo 22:41, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Scandinavian Airlines Flight 2748

Scandinavian Airlines Flight 2748 (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Minor, injury-free crash landing. Hardly newsworthy, let alone encyclopedic. PROD tag added, but removed with talk page comments indicating that the creator has confused Wikipedia with Aviation Week and Space Technology: no, WP's not an aviation newsmagazine. Calton | Talk 15:28, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

  • "The two incidents looks very similar and Flight 2748 is now the reason for grounding many Dash-8-400 world-wide. Bombardier has issued an AOM (All Operator Message) about possible, unidentifed landing gear problems. SAS has grounded its 33 planes (of a total of 160) of this type and the implications of this event is important." - In other words, current events and technical aviation news. --Calton | Talk 14:18, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge this and articles about related incidents with the Dash-8 into something like "2007 Dash-8 landing gear problems". --M1ss1ontomars2k4 15:43, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge - Wtih Scandinavian Airlines Flight 1209. Maybe not notable individually, but immediately after this flight SAS grounded all their 33 Dash-8/Q400 planes and, a few hours later, Bombardier recommended that all Dash-8/Q400s with more than 10,000 flights be grounded until further notice. Should probably be combined to one page. - BillCJ 15:50, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep...I agree with Bill about a merge, but since this was the incident that led to the grounding of the fleet, and the long-term grounding on higher time Dash 8s, this would be the logical place to put the content. As for notability, the fact that the incident had wider ranging consequences makes it notable. per our proposed notability guidelines at the Aviation accident task force. AKRadeckiSpeaketh 16:01, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep/Merge I'm with Bill and Alan here - the actual incident is not immediatly notable, but the implications most certainly are. Grounding aircraft is a big move to take, and usualy costs millions in lost business. Thus meets our notability guidlines for such incidents. Also, has a lasting impact on safety because, due to the serious nature of aircraft grounding, something allways happens, even if it's a decrease in the credibility of certain organisations connected to aviation safety. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 16:36, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge to the Q400 article. Eusebeus 18:39, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Create new article from Scandinavian Airlines Flight 1209/Scandinavian Airlines Flight 2748 called September 2007 Scandinavian Airlines Q400 incidents. I also think a merge is the way to go, since both aircraft are the same type, from the same airline, with the same problem. Choosing which article to merge into though poses issues which would be best solved with a new article. Anynobody 00:55, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment - best idea yet. AKRadeckiSpeaketh 01:58, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
      • Comment I like it, although the destination I would like to see for the content would be Scandinavian Airlines Flights 1209 and 2748. Certainly, after some consideration I too think that, since neither incident would have caused the groundings on it's own, we should not merge into one flight or the other. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 06:22, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep - this crash resulted in all Dash 8-Q400s to be grounded (second similar incident in 4 days time). Noteworthy. --MoRsE 04:45, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Europe-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 05:15, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. This is one of two accidents (the other was at Aalborg) which caused the grounding of the entire Dash 8 Q400 fleet, so it had an impact on the aviation industry well beyond Vilnius. Very well covered in Scandinavian media. Sjakkalle (Check!) 05:57, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep or merge. Notable, also as a news story. Punkmorten 07:00, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep The incident is newsworthy as it happens a few days after a similar near-disaster incident. This second incident caused grounding of many Dash-8 world-wide. I would suggest that the article is kept, and updated with more facts as the official investigation proceed. Nisselua 09:52, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep, I agree with Sjakkalle.--Nikolaj Winther 14:07, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge with Dash-8. As aircraft mishaps go, this is not much more notable than a tire blowout. Scary, yes. Coulda been worse, definitely. Notable or memorable, no. Mandsford 22:54, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Wow, are you comparing the crash of the Concorde to this crap? Mandsford 17:26, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Not directly, I'm pointing out that while a landing gear failure happens at a rate of one a fortnight (more often more than that), and are therefore genraly comparable to tyre blowouts (as well as being the same general area of the aircraft), this is slightly different from your typical version of either due to the groundings after the two incidents; to put it in context, there must ave been tens of thousands of blowouts since Concorde, but to the best of my knowledge Concorde was the last time it resulted in aircraft groundings, and it was pretty spectacular. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 17:31, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
    • comment - FWIW, and because "notability" is conveyed by non-trivial media sources, LA Times carried a story on the grounding on page 2 of the business section yesterday...coverage of a degree that doesn't often happen with aviation issues. AKRadeckiSpeaketh 18:03, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Reply (to Blood Red) OK, I understand your point, and I agree that a blowout can have tragic results (particularly in an automobile!). If Air France 4590 had merely blown a tire without anything more than a fright for the passengers and crew, it wouldn't have been notable, even if it had resulted in all the Concordes being grounded. I sincerely wish that Air France 4590 hadn't become notable... it was a horrible tragedy that was traced to a piece of debris on a runway. Perhaps a better analogy would be a recent incident (in the USA) where the Mattel toy company had to recall toys because it turned out that the toys were covered with lead-based paint. The recall is notable. But the name of the child who had to get medical treatment for lead poisioning is trivia, and the story of the family is of no historical value. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mandsford (talk • contribs) 21:57, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep, per above. M.K. 22:01, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep, then merge and redirect with Scandinavian Airlines Flight 1209 and related incidents there. Dhaluza 17:13, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, as an incident it is not entirely notable, yes several aircraft were grounded as a result, but this should be mentioned in the Dash 8 page with references to the accident reports. Aircraft being grounded is not all that an uncommon occurrence in the industry. --Russavia 02:24, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Well documented and had repercussions on any airline that used the same aircraft (many all over the world) regarding safety standards. Injuries or deaths are not litmus tests of notability. If the nom truely feels that way, they wouldn't have also nominated Scandinavian Airlines Flight 1209 for AfD that actually did have injuries. --Oakshade 20:46, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Reluctantly, I agree to keep this article, on grounds that a similar incident JetBlue Airways Flight 292 exists and deemed notable. KyuuA4 21:18, 21 September 2007 (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.