Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2015 Afghanistan helicopter crash

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 delete. T. Canens (talk) 22:17, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

2015 Afghanistan helicopter crash

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

Miltary aircraft accidents are rarely notable unless other factors come into considerations, like the death of someone wiki notable, I cant see any factors here that make this accident of note for a stand-alone article, mention at List of accidents and incidents involving military aircraft (2010–present) is all that is required. MilborneOne (talk) 19:30, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. MilborneOne (talk) 19:36, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. MilborneOne (talk) 19:37, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nominator. Tragic but WP:NOTNEWS also applies....William 19:37, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom and the well-established consensus. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:47, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, WP:NOTNEWS, routine military incident.TheLongTone (talk) 11:45, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. A crash killing seventeen people isn't routine even in military terms. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:10, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Necrothesp. 217.30.195.63 (talk) 21:44, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the number of deaths has no bearing on whether the article should be kept. Is there significant in-depth coverage? No there isn't; the requirements of the general notability guidelines have not been met. YSSYguy (talk) 08:21, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Afghanistan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:14, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:14, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above, can be mentioned in 2015 in aviation or 2015 in Afghanistan instead. Brandmeister^talk 08:42, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non-notable unless there was a notable person among the dead, casualties on the ground, or civilian passengers, doesn't matter how many dead--Petebutt (talk) 15:48, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Definitely not notable. Haven't even heard of this before. Versus001 (talk) 19:35, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – A helicopter crash killing 17 people – whether civilian or military – is automatically notable because of the unusually high death toll. Any military crash with a death toll that high is far from routine. Such a crash probably would not be nominated for deletion if it occurred in the United States, Canada, or Europe, which should be a factor in considering the "notability" of the accident. Mdnavman (talk) 20:19, 16 August 2015 (UTC) mdnavman[reply]
Delete This article fails WP:GNG by a mile.--Eat me, I'm a red bean (take a huge bite)^{i've made a huge mess} 00:19, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete Not enough content, if more is added it would be keepable SOXROX (talk) 01:13, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - It is hard to call a crash killing 17 "routine," but it does seem that consensus is that military crashes of this magnitude are generally not regarded as sufficiently noteworthy to merit stand-alone encyclopedic coverage. This decision would have been harder if this piece was more than a stub. Carrite (talk) 02:07, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Wikipedia is WP:NOTNEWS, no lasting impact shown Kraxler (talk) 18:32, 17 August 2015 (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.