Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Air Canada Flight 018 Stowaway Incident

< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Patiodweller (talk | contribs) at 13:01, 17 October 2019. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 13:01, 17 October 2019 by Patiodweller (talk | contribs)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Air Canada Flight 018 Stowaway Incident

New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Hardly noteworthy for a mention in Misplaced Pages and certainly not noteworthy for a stand-alone article. Misplaced Pages is not a place for trivial news stories. Contested PROD MilborneOne (talk) 21:51, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. MilborneOne (talk) 22:03, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Delete per WP:NOTNEWS....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 22:50, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
Keep - For a Canadian incident, the sources include international (Japan, U.S., Australia). Notability is established. XavierItzm (talk) 00:37, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
Delete fails WP:GNG, WP:NOTNEWS. SportingFlyer T·C 03:17, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
Delete – 'Trivial news story' is a good description. Is there any sign of enduring coverage either? --Deeday-UK (talk) 11:18, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
Delete - classic case of WP:NOTNEWSPAPER. Trivial incident, no lasting effects. The news media covered it for its novelty, but Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia, not a newspaper. - Ahunt (talk) 12:30, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
Delete. Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia and not a newspaper. LefcentrerightTalk (plz ping) 14:40, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 12:59, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 12:59, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. Lightburst (talk) 19:49, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Keep I performed some cleanup of the article - and added sections and WP:RSs. Outcome of arrests and Mr. X. The incident was international WP:GEOSCOPE reported in the press around the world, and even necessitated a Terror alert from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Notability is not temporary and this incident is notable. Lightburst (talk) 19:49, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
Comment: I have reviewed you changes and, while that has improved the article and is appreciated, it has not changed the basic issue that the story behind it is WP:NOTNEWS. We are in "cat stuck in tree - rescued by fire dept" territory here. Sure it made the newspapers, it still doesn't belong in an encyclopedia. - Ahunt (talk) 01:37, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
Interesting perspective. This incident uncovered an international smuggling ring and produced 8 arrests and at least one conviction (3 year sentence) along with worldwide coverage and Terror alerts for customs around the world: but you compare this to a cat in a tree? Sigh... Of course I disagree. Lightburst (talk) 01:43, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
@Ahunt: I have added WP:SIGCOV and the disposition of the convicted. Lightburst (talk) 02:17, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
- Coomment stuffing the article with citations still doesnt indicate significant courage, it still looks like a local new story with little effect or coverage in the rest of the world. MilborneOne (talk) 16:13, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
Delete per WP:NOTNEWS, fails WP:GNG. -- Begoon 20:14, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
@Begoon: You are right that we are not the news. This particular incident had international coverage and necessitated airline changes around the world. Lightburst (talk) 20:21, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
Keep I have read the article and believe it is a notable case because its the first of its kind, and it causes them to reveal their airport security. This has revealed a security threat as anyone can impersonate someone else wearing one of these masks. Dream Focus 06:48, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
Keep Yes, this was a noteworthy event. I am basing my vote primarily on the significant coverage of this event by South China Morning Post and Associated Press. !Vote by User:BehindtheKeys - the !vote is on the bottom of the article so I moved it here for the editor.
Keep per persuasive arguments by Lightburst. Pithy delete !votes citing WP:NOTNEWS without elaboration are not persuasive. ~Kvng (talk) 15:40, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
- COmment Presumable because anybody reading the article would see the NOTNEWS angle fairly clearly so doesnt really need elaboration of the obvious. Clearly not noteworthy for a standalone article despite the citation stuffing. MilborneOne (talk) 16:13, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
@MilborneOne: "Citation stuffing" is a baseless claim which tells me you did not look at the article. WP:HEY. It is quite obvious to the readers that the added citations were for information regarding:

The stowaway Incident
The 8 arrests
The conviction of a conspirator
The placement of MR. X (apparent asylum)
The DHS terror alert.
The worldwide Air Bulletin warnings

I am saddened by the WP:RUSH to delete rather than improve WP:NOTCLEANUP. We have a case of WP:GEOSCOPE based on the WP:RSs. The article is now worthy of inclusion. Lightburst (talk) 17:00, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

@MilborneOne: Lightburst and others have made some very respectable improvements to the article since you nominated it and your position is that this is citation stuffing? SMH. ~Kvng (talk) 17:06, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Comment please assume good faith in others, saying that others "clearly did not read the article" is not clever and probably worth an apology. MilborneOne (talk) 17:17, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
Delete Seems like a trivial newspaper story that is not worthy of a stand alone article in an encyclopedia. - Samf4u (talk) 20:11, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
Keep - Due to expansions made since the original nomination. Whoever ends up closing this should also keep in mind the improvement that was made to the article over the course of the deletion discussion.Patiodweller (talk) 13:00, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Categories: