Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FedEx Flight 7145

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. Sango 123 23:59, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FedEx Flight 7145[edit]

This is not a major aviation incident. No one died, the cause of the crash is not peculiar; its just a plane that crashed. It has no encyclopedic value. – Zntrip 01:07, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom; non-notable flight that experienced a minor emergency. Only four relevant Google results [1]--TBCTaLk?!? 01:15, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and per google search. --Daniel Olsen 01:20, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete aviation-incident cruft. Not every single filed incident is notable, and this one sure as hell isn't. There's a very good reason why it didn't get any news coverage. My Alt Account 01:21, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete — pfff... no one died, not interesting ;) (per nom) -- lucasbfr ^talk 01:33, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Cynicism aside, non-notable.UberCryxic 02:23, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. --Ogdred 03:42, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Casper2k3 04:52, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per palpable lack of external interest. There never will be any real sources on this apparently unimportant and not particularly unusual incident. Guy 12:15, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, appears to be not as notable as other articles in Category:In-flight airliner fires. --Elkman - (Elkspeak) 16:52, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete per nom, though it's reasonably well written Computerjoe 's talk 18:36, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Although it is obvious how this discussion is going, I like the idea of this article. It is an article about the successful control of an emergency situation. It is from emergencies like this one that our technical society learns to improve. Because of this incident, emergency handling procedures and emergency equipment can be improved. If the incident had been a disaster, and then, I suppose, notable, with all the Souls on Board (S.O.B.'s) dead, then there would be fewer learnings. But most likely, for this article to be notable the authors would need to make more clear the notable learnings from this incident. I think there was a hint of those learnings in the criticism of the air traffic response to their emergency. As an aside, it is most likely very notable to the family and friends of the crew that they did not become an encyclopedic event. WVhybrid 23:12, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not a database of incidents. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FedEx Flight 597. Emergencies should be described on a page where people will look for them. Pavel Vozenilek 22:18, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. per nom. —dima/s-ko/ 03:05, 16 September 2006 (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.