Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/U.S. Airways Flight 2495

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. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:23, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

U.S. Airways Flight 2495 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)

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

See WP:NOTNEWS and WP:AIRCRASH. Pretty much a minor incident. No one was injured in it and the plane didn't crash anywhere, but stopped on EMAS. Ilyushka ☃^Talk!_Contribs 08:04, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. -- Bradjamesbrown (talk) 08:23, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete No injuries, doesn't appear to be anything more than an aborted takeoff- they happen, they're forgotten. Delete as (luckily) failing WP:AIRCRASH. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 08:25, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Everything that happens to an airliner should not have its own article. Glad no one was hurt. Kitfoxxe (talk) 09:27, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete An aborted take off can happen anytime anywhere, and may NOT make much of a difference unless you lose your job for being late... -_Rsrikanth05 (talk) 10:11, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete does not meet any criteria at WP:AIRCRASH. Already has a sentence at the article about the airport, as is not a significant incident in the history of the airline, so there is no point to merging this anywhere. Thryduulf (talk) 10:45, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete clearly violates WP:AIRCRASH. Arsenikk ^(talk) 10:51, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Delete for no indication of notability whatsoever. Blodance the Seeker 11:52, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - An aborted takeoff (as happened in this case) does not grant notability. (Also, I love how, according to the infobox, it happened tomorrow.) DitzyNizzy (aka Jess)|(talk to me)|(What I've done) 13:17, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Might I recommend that we wait to determine delete until the investigation is completed? Something notable may arise out of the investigation. I created this page to have something to work with following the investigation. Also, I believe that this is notable, as there are only 28 airports in the nation that have this safety system in place to stop an aircraft from overshooting the runway in the event of an Aborted Takeoff. ^[1]. To date this is only the 5th usage of this system since 1999. (See above reference)Cindrah (talk) 15:09, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • That is an argument for including a summary of the accident in the article about the system, not an argument why it merits a standalone article. Thryduulf (talk) 17:31, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Aborted takeoffs are surprisely common. Fails WP:AIRCRASH. If something MAJOR comes from the investigation then the page could be recreated focusing on the outcome. Spikydan1 (talk) 15:14, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete "The pilot aborted the take-off at 16:13L (21:13Z)[1] due to an electrical warning light that illuminated advising him not to take-off." If they fit little (or big - I've not seen one) lights that tell you not to go up, they're expecting them to be needed. The first use of the arrestor system might be notable - the fifth is becoming a habit. The fact that the system is installed implies that it might well be needed too. (But at $1000 per EMAS block, I would hope not TOO often). By the way, I think this might be the sixth incident. Engineered materials arrestor system Peridon (talk) 17:30, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment These 5 or 6 incidents should really be mentioned in the EMAS article. Mjroots (talk) 06:50, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment After looking at the EMAS page on wikipedia, it references an aticle that detailed Alex Rodriguez's flight overshooting the runway. After attempting to access the article, it was not found. According to the FAA website, there have only been 4 accidents listed involving EMAS, this would make the 5th. Cindrah (talk) 06:54, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Strictly non-notable. Warrah (talk) 18:14, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, fails WP:AIRCRASH. Incident is adequately covered elsewhere in Wikipedia. Mjroots (talk) 20:23, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Non-notable. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 01:14, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Non-notable, per above. Crum375 (talk) 04:05, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Even though it is not notable and there are no deaths - the accident is still under investigation (at least wait till the investigation is completed) Whenaxis (talk) 07:13, 25 January 2010 (EST)

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.