Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ural Airlines Flight 178

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. WP:SNOW keep. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 09:41, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ural Airlines Flight 178

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

While I appreciate the effort that went into writing this article, Wikipedia is not a news source and this event is not notable enough to be included in Wikipedia. Bird/plane strikes happen every day. – Daybeers (talk) 22:30, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. – Daybeers (talk) 22:30, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. – Daybeers (talk) 22:30, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Bird strikes happen every day, yes, but very few result in the crash of a jet plane, and fewer still result in everyone in a jet plane crash surviving. This is a notable incident that received widespread media coverage and was featured on WP's main page. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 22:36, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep A lot of media coverage not to mention that ATC has complained for years about dumps (possibly illegal ones at that) in the area attacking birds. It could lead to new policies regarding bird management near and at the airport, not to mention the possible shutdown of some of the nearby dumps. Not to mention it is very rare for birds to bring down a passenger jet carrying well over 200 people outside of the airport resulting in a hull loss with no fatalities. - Omega13a (talk) 08:56, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is indeed a highly uncommon occurrence, and sources appear to demonstrate notability. Although it's too soon to know if there will be lasting coverage, given the currently available news sources and effects mentioned therein, it seems pretty likely that this accident and its consequences will remain notable and significant (thus fulfilling WP:LASTING and hence WP:NEVENT). ComplexRational (talk) 13:19, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: A crash landing of a regularly scheduled commercial passenger airliner resulting in injuries and a hull loss meets the standards of notability. The crash has received widespread worldwide coverage in multiple independent media sources. Easily meets WP:GNG. RecycledPixels (talk) 15:35, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Snow keep per all above. Mjroots (talk) 18:39, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep per all the arguments above. As for the nominator's rationale, people die every day too, yet the death of Michael Jackson is a stand-alone article. Why not nominating it too for deletion?--Jetstreamer ^Talk 21:53, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 22:48, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 22:48, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Further compounding things is the disaster continues to be discussed in Russian, for instance this article from only a few days ago: [1] It's basically the Russian version of what the Hudson landing was to the United States. Easy keep. SportingFlyer T·C 00:35, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Like what everyone said above, this is notable especially in Russia. There's been waste dumps by the airport which led to birds being around the runway at Zhukovsky. There's also been news reports of details of the accident since the crash and it's also as similar to the Miracle at the Hudson and is even compared to the event. I think this article should be kept on Wikipedia because on how significant the outcome will be with the waste dumps, the international media, and probably new safety measures after the investigation is complete. Swagging (talk) 01:02, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep it is snowing Lightburst (talk) 01:15, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – unless you're proposing to delete US Airways Flight 1549, which is entirely comparable bar WP:WORLDVIEW! Rosbif73 (talk) 07:11, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per all above. Bookscale (talk) 10:48, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, similar to US Airways Flight 1549 as said above.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 15:32, 2 October 2019 (UTC).I'm surprised the consensus is so overwhelming. I nearly miss wikipedia's never ending arguments![reply]
Snow Keep - The crash resulted in a hull loss, and in depth coverage regarding the bird strike. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 01:20, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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.