Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ozark Air Lines Flight 982

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. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 22:05, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ozark Air Lines Flight 982

Ozark Air Lines Flight 982 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

notability

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:23, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:23, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. I'm not going to comment on the notability, but it certainly does not fail
  WP:RS and I'm mystified as to why you think it does. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:13, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply
  ]

If you think they don't apply then ignore them, there's plenty of other meat on the bone!!--Petebutt (talk) 13:53, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's just odd when an AfD nomination claims things that clearly aren't true. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:11, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. The crash is certainly verifiable whether or not it is notable enough for an article of its own. If the crash is deemed insufficiently notable for an article, this page should be redirected to Ozark Air Lines#Incidents. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 14:21, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Question,
  WP:V? Oakshade (talk) 03:53, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Keep - a crash of a
  WP:V is already met. Article is a mess, it would benefit from an infobox and some structure, but needing improvement is never a reason to delete and article. Mjroots (talk) 21:08, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Weak Keep and improve: the article right now reads more like
  WP:RS from. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 01:01, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Keep. The only claim in the nomination that is worthy of discussion is whether or not the subject of the article meets
  WP:N. A crash of a commercial jetliner in regular service resulting in a total loss of the aircraft and injuries to passengers, resulting in ongoing news coverage despite occurring on a busy news day (happened the same day as the return to earth of Apollo 8 and a different fatal air crash at Chicago O'Hare) clearly meets notability standards. RecycledPixels (talk) 16:18, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Keep Not really sure what's going on here with this nomination... clearly passes
  WP:GNG. SportingFlyer T·C 01:34, 23 June 2019 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 22:28, 23 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iowa-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 22:28, 23 June 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.