Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2022 Pakistan Army helicopter incident

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 merge to List of accidents and incidents involving military aircraft (2020–present). There is consensus here that the subject is covered in multiple, independent reliable sources. The issue of contention is whether the event will be of lasting interest (per WP:LASTING etc.) or whether the existing coverage is merely part of the rolling news cycle. There are no compelling arguments in the discussion to suggest this is any more than a standalone one-off event, or has any more significance than the other article-less entries at List of accidents and incidents involving military aircraft (2020–present).

AfD is not a referendum but for those interested there are 5 keep !votes to 8 delete/merge !votes (not including the nomination itself) so either way the outcome is the same. Waggers TALK 13:42, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

2022 Pakistan Army helicopter incident

[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)

This is an article that was sent to draft during NPP and it was resubmitted via AFC and immediately accepted. This should be deleted for several reasons,

WP:LASTING. Bruxton (talk) 13:31, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Aviation, Transportation, and Pakistan. Bruxton (talk) 13:32, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Bruxton (talk) 15:25, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. It seems like a notable, newsworthy event that is already attracting international attention. It has been reviewed as per the AfC process. Local and international news that suggests

WP:GNG

compliance to me:

WP:LASTING RS interest or effects beyond the breaking news cycle. Military aviation accidents don't generally get this. Hence the nominator's WP:TOOSOON rationale at best. Again, Wikipedia is not a newspaper. • Gene93k (talk) 18:16, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
I am aware of
WP:GEOSCOPE
is, which is why I shared German, Indian and Canadian news. I don't understand why you said "again" because usually that implies that you needed to repeat something because someone wasn't listening, but this seems like your first comment here. If time passes and there is not lasting coverage, then I'd support deletion then. Until then, I see it like this:
Notability Y

International attention Y

Lasting coverage ? CT55555 (talk) 18:26, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@

WP:NORUSH. Bruxton (talk) 18:33, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Keep it's a major notable event, it was included in wikipedia's Portal:Current events. 103.141.159.229 (talk) 18:10, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per
WP:AIRCRASH, military helicopters crash all the time, nothing notable about this one. LG Sarfaraz Ali doesn't have his own page. Mztourist (talk) 03:01, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Keep. I would have said that the coverage and the death of a lieutenant-general make it notable. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:04, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, clear example of
WP:TOOSOON. The death of a general officer does not automatically confer notability, because (as has already been pointed out) Lt Gen Ali is apparently not wikinotable himself. Even if he were, it may be sufficient to discuss the crash into the page about his life, as has been done with other notable military leaders killed in aircraft crashes or shootdowns. Carguychris (talk) 18:47, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Merge a sentence or two to List of accidents and incidents involving military aircraft (2020–present), as right now this doesn't merit a standalone article. Military air crashes are relatively common and there's nothing right now that suggests this one is exceptional. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 01:34, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I think it is notable. If it was only about soldiers, it would be fine, but in this accident, 5 out of 6 were higher rank officers of Pakistan Army, which makes it notable.Vicozico13 (talk) 03:33, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per Trainsandotherthings: death toll not that high, can be adequately covered in the list. Mjroots (talk) 15:25, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Factors such as a death toll, the ranking of the deceased are really not indicators of event notability. I would encourage people to be informed by
WP:EVENT rather than death tool or military rank of victims. If 1,000 generals died and no newspaper, book or academic paper reported it = probably not notable. If a sergeant hurt their knee and it was front page news for months = it is probably notable. Please let the relevant guidance guide us. CT55555 (talk) 15:31, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Comment – I believe we've consensus of topic being notable (GNG) and having international coverage, and have no agreement on whether it's going to have long lasting effect or not. To give an idea, I'll say Pakistan is pseudo-Democracy, where army holds much power and influence directly or indirectly. So a military general dying here, is quite a big deal here. Additionally it happened in no common circumstances, 2 months before appointment of new
Chief of Army Staff (Pakistan) and Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee (given history of appointments, he was also a potential candidate). It'll mustly cause different conspiracy theories to pop up and make their into history books, and news media, as it's happening right now [1], [2]. For me it's long lasting effect is certain, at least in Pakistan. Thanks Ahated (talk!) 10:56, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:31, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Merge To
talk) 10:21, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Merge to
WP:NOTNEWS. ––FormalDude talk 09:41, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 22:18, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or merge per TAOT. Looks to me to be a "routine" event, with no lasting coverage. SWinxy (talk) 03:13, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What is the following, if not lasting coverage? What would lasting coverage look like if this is not this?
1. Geo TV coverage two days ago: https://www.geo.tv/latest/434068-govt-to-arrest-all-people-invovled-in-social-media-campaign-against-balochistan-copter-crash
2. UrduPoint coverage from yesterday https://www.urdupoint.com/en/miscellaneous/tributes-paid-at-pak-embassy-to-army-officers-1548672.html
3. Washington Post article mentioning it yesterday: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/08/18/pakistan-ary-news-khan-sharif/ CT55555 (talk) 05:38, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Keep - The article meets
Sarfraz Ali (Pakistan Army officer), the article would be suited staying as it. ElderZamzam (talk) 13:13, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

talk) 13:24, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Deleteor merge per FormalDude and others.
WP:NOTNEWS applies. Stifle (talk) 09:12, 25 August 2022 (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.