Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of casualties of the 2010 Polish Air Force Tu-154 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 snowball keep. –xeno^talk 13:02, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of casualties of the 2010 Polish Air Force Tu-154 crash

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

Wikipedia is not a memorial. Long list of non-notable people noted for one event. Woogee (talk) 21:36, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Given the international importance of this, the President and his wife, the Head of the Army, the Head of the National Bank, etc., etc., this is HARDLY non-notable people.David V Houston (talk) 21:41, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The list of people who died in 9/11 was moved off to another site. Note that I never said anything about deleting the article about the crash. See Wikipedia:Victim Lists. Woogee (talk) 21:42, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Victim Lists is an essay; it is neither guidance nor policy. I cannot agree with the suggestion at Victim Lists that every single person in a list needs to notable for the list to be notable. In this case the majority of victims are notable and that on its own would be enough to make the list notable. Greenshed (talk) 23:56, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This request for deletion for is a misinterpretation of the Wikipedia is not a memorial rule. An accident like this is of major political importance. Imagine what kind of constitutional chaos would ensue of this type of accident happened in the US, UK, France, Germany, or Russia.Kinema τ
Keep. This is a very important political event. Tangurena (talk) 21:58, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- And thus we have an article on the subject. Woogee (talk) 22:08, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Outrageous nomination. It was a Presidential Fleet airplane full of highest-ranking officials, who were mega-notable. - Darwinek (talk) 22:27, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for the obnoxious attitude. Now explain to me what makes the members of the flight crew notable. Woogee (talk) 01:43, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Total misinterpretation of memorial notion (I'd argue that that it's essay isn't quite enough to call it a rule). I could support in principle the reduction of the list (e.g. removing flight crew and other individuals that would not fulfill notability criteria), but the fact remains that firstly a large number of very notable individuals died and the inclusion of others for the sake of completeness does not appear to make the article unwieldy, nor does it in anyway draw attention away from the more notable individuals. Secondly, simply because someone doesn't have a wikipedia article doesn't mean they are not notable and I think for now an open mind should be kept. This event may prompt editors to create articles for these individuals. I know WP shouldn't be a crystal ball, but the notability of a large number of people on the list justifies the list remaining as is. Fenix down (talk) 22:40, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I have to support the thoughts of everyone above. If it had been a commercial plane that just happened to be carrying some low ranking Assistant Secretary, than I would say delete. But this on had a president killed, along with nearly te rest of the government. Buggie111 (talk)
Redirect and Merge - Put it into a table in the main article as it does not need its own. Truthsort (talk) 23:41, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Persons are notable for many reasons and the list is not a memorial. Greenshed (talk) 23:49, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or Merge I say either keep this list, or list all victims on the article about the crash itself. For example, Maguindanao massacre has such a section. If this info is available to Wikipedia, we should use it.--RM (Be my friend) 23:54, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Snowball Keep - the List is necessary to understand the gravity of the event for the Republic of Poland. --noclador (talk) 01:07, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:41, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:41, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
this page should stay, there is plenty of notable people on the flight that died... (IP 99.234.185.68) [1]
Keep. Remove some names, if necessary (the crew, most likely). But this is long enough - enough notables were killed - that I think it would be wise to keep it out of the main article for now. It's simply a matter of length. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 02:53, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, and include all names. I actually came to this article just now specifically to see the names of the crewmembers. That said, I would also support a merge back to the main article, as long as the information itself is maintained. --El on ka 03:17, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/Unsplit into the main article. WP:NOTMEMORIAL for all the non-notable dead people on this list (crew, bodyguards, the "other" list for the most part), and MERGE the notable people back into the main article. 70.29.208.247 (talk) 05:09, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Obviously notable, important information, and it's too long a list to be merged, which is why it was split out in the first place. Rebecca (talk) 05:55, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I've always been in favour of Wikipedia holding statistical information like victims lists in any case, but in a situation like this where so many of the dead are notable a list like this is essential to a clear understanding of the subject.--Jackyd101 (talk) 06:39, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I also wanted to point something out in response to the person above is asking why the flight crew are notable. They aren't and that is why they don't have articles (if they did and there was no clear claim to notability then I would vote delete on those articles). This list is not an attempt to confer notability on them, it is a notable list that happens to include them - the person who wrote that above is misinterpretating NOT:MEMORIAL.--Jackyd101 (talk) 06:42, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment since it is pretty snowy around here (and I haven't said my opinion yet), may I or someone close this as snow keep? Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 06:44, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Facepalm keep Jesus wept. Lugnuts (talk) 06:57, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Obvious keep - If this only had one or two notable people, I'd say delete under Wp:NOTMEMORIAL. But since the vast majority of the victims were notable, it's one of the most obvious keeps I've dealt with. DitzyNizzy (aka Jess)|(talk to me)|(What I've done) 09:45, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per all the users above--DAI (Δ) 10:30, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, obviously. —Nightstallion 12:37, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Snowball keep Quite an obvious mis-interpretation of both MEMORIAL and BLP1E. It's a valid fork for size reasons, and arguing who should and should not be listed is rather gauche. MickMacNee (talk) 12:53, 14 April 2010 (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.