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. Thanks everyone for participating. :) Please assume good faith with my decision. If you believe this article was deleted without good reason, please request undeletion at deletion request, not my talk page. Thank you. SarahStierch (talk) 03:53, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Korean Air Flight 2033 (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)

Fails Wikipedia:Notability FonEengIneeR7 ^talk 10:42, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Non notable incident....William 15:31, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Runway overruns happen all the time.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 16:12, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I don't know for sure, but I think this may be the Korean Air flight where the pilot and co-pilot had a fight during.(The CVR transcript is circumstantial evidence 2033 might be it) Sometime long ago I remember reading that happened. An editor out there may want to look into it. That may be a factor in whether this crash is notable or not....William 16:53, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I was able to find these sources: Planecrashes.org and AirDisaster.com. The second is the one already cited in the article, but for some reason, the article doesn't directly include the entire conflict. I am not sure how reliable they are considered. TCMemoire (talk) 17:20, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This is the flight you are talking about William. See [1]. Yet, I do think that this incident is anything but notable (it was not even a fight, just a small dispute). As Jetstreamer already said, runway excursions are frequent occurrences and do not deserve an independent article. FonEengIneeR7 ^talk 17:28, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions....William 16:53, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions....William 16:53, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Korea-related deletion discussions.....William 16:53, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions....William 16:53, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep: it currently does not establish any of the criteria on the notability guideline for plane crashes, but could meet them; other sources report that the airplane caught fire and was completely written off, so if major damage was done to the aircraft or if the hull was lost, it would meet one criterion, which is enough to establish notability. Also, the aircraft has been mentioned in several independent sources: Planecrashes.org, The Independent (UK newspaper), AirFleets.com. I am not sure how reliable these sources are considered, but it's a start. TCMemoire (talk) 17:20, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment We cannot create an article for every W/O, even if it might meet the criteria. Yesterday's Antonov crash was also a W/O and even involved fatalities but its article was deleted. FonEengIneeR7 ^talk 17:33, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, entirely unremarkable incident.TheLongTone (talk) 11:22, 3 January 2014 (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.