Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emirates SkyCargo Flight 9788: Difference between revisions

Keep this article!!! It’s events are in my opinion notable enough, if this gets deleted you may aswell delete the article about China Airlines 605 as that incident was pretty similar to this one but WITHOUT any casualties

Emirates SkyCargo Flight 9788 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

WP:NOTNEWS. Point 4 of WP:EVENTCRITERIA – Routine kinds of news events (including most …accidents…), whether or not tragic or widely reported at the time – are usually not notable. XYZ1233212 (talk) 02:00, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Theres plenty of other notable runway excursions. Miami Air for example, what about the Kai Tak one featured with this one? I dont see why this should be deleted, it’s definitely not portraying a news like article. Grffffff (talk) 02:10, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Are you voting keep??? Zaptain United (talk) 02:16, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am 108.247.26.224 (talk) 02:25, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes Grffffff (talk) 02:30, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you are voting for keeping this article, then you should probably mark your comment as keep. I won’t do it because I think that is a violation of AFD rules. Zaptain United (talk) 02:32, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ehh but i think yall get the point hopefully Grffffff (talk) 02:33, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I am keeping, this accident is a hull loss of a Boeing 747 since 2020 and the first accident of Emirates SkyCargo. Urlocalhitman10 (talk) 06:07, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

me neither, it also involved a large aircraft, the 747-400, and 2 fatalities, which is very noteworthy for a runway excursion 2600:1702:65C4:6810:751D:2C1F:1A30:DA13 (talk) 02:16, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as it’s the first hull loss of a 747 in a long time, and there were 2 fatalities, which is very uncommon and noteworthy. 108.247.26.224 (talk) 02:21, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep If this accident occurrence on passenger plane, the casualties maybe very serious! You may refer CI605 accident at 1993 for the plane ran off the runway, and float on the water in Hong Kong. —TYC (talk) 03:12, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep for now: While it’s still very early to say if this will receive ongoing coverage, I think it’s probably worth keeping it up for now, but to wait and see if ongoing coverage continues. While news outlets are definitely talking about it a lot, and it could be said to be rather unusual given the aircraft involved, its location, and the ground fatalities, it is a cargo flight accident without many other things that make it particularly unique.–BrayLockBoy (talk) 04:31, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Two fatalities and a hull loss. This definitely notable. NVS3992 (talk) 05:38, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep with the hull loss, circumstances and significant coverage, it has established notability. Equine-man (talk) 05:43, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment, I have not yet reviewed the sourcing of this article. But before someone comes and tries to close this as a SNOW delete, I want to remind that the existence of other articles, the amount of fatalities, and the fact there was a hull loss, has nothing to do with whether or not this is notable for Wikipedia. Deletion votes should be based on notability through reliable sources. Esolo5002 (talk) 05:52, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, just read the replies above… IndoMaja (talk) 07:02, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Jet Airliner accidents in particular are statistically NOT common. Death by ground collision is rare and unusual. Modern safety culture is to report, investigate and learn from all accidents involving aviation, marine, railways and large structures. There are specific government bodies for investigating and preventing these special kinds of accident, such as the AAIB and NTSB, which exist to help save lives in the future. This accident is now a headline on the BBC World Service, an article on BBC News website, The London Standard newspaper; and all reputable media are or will be reporting it with photographs clearly showing the scale and nature of the event. An aircraft costing millions of dollars crashing at an international airport and killing ground crew is NOT trivial, will have subsequent consequences, such as changes in operating procedure, is perfectly notable, and will be referred to in the future. The article provides helpful, reliable information on an event of interest to many readers. Wikipedia notability guidelines are more comprehensive than the points quoted and should be interpreted as a whole rather than cherry-picked to make an individual point. “Don’t rush to delete articles.” WP:RAPID. Strategically, making good decisions goes above and beyond general policy. Editors are wise to demonstrate common sense and mature judgement, which broadly are earned the hard way through age, experience and years spent in a serious study of the subject. David Crayford ☎ 07:17, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: I’d say a fatal hull loss of a 747 is notable enough for an article. More info will likely come out in the next few days considering this only happened today. Give it some time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hexes54 (talk • contribs) 07:37, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Hull loss of a 747 with casualties ranks high in notability, in my opinion. If this article is deleted for not being notable enough, then articles such as Turkish Cargo 6491 is also eligible for deletion; which I don’t think is the case. RealDeemZ (talk) 07:46, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]