On 7/7/07, Brian Salter-Duke b_duke@bigpond.net.au wrote:
On Sat, Jul 07, 2007 at 10:29:23AM +0100, Guy Chapman aka JzG wrote:
On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 18:45:06 -0700, "K P" kpbotany@gmail.com wrote:
Republic Airlines flight 4912 & SkyWest Airlines flight 5741
Good grief. We should think about starting a project for news stories, where things like this that have absolutely zero lasting significance can go. We could call it,. I don't know, how about... Wikinews.
What baffles me even more is that it was kept by AfD. Are we really lowering the bar to the point where every single near miss gets an article? Are we the FAA Wiki now?
I suggest that the problem here is the confusion we have about notability and sources. This has sources. However by any reasonable criteria, in my humble opinion, it is not encyclopedic. We need to have a notability set of criteria that decides whether a topic is, well, notable, i.e important enough to have an article if there are sources, or not notable so it does not have an article even if there are sources.
I don't think it's appropriate for you to call it "confusion" over notability and sources. To some people, notability means having sources. This isn't due to confusion, it's due to a difference of opinion.
I hope you'll respond to my last message about how this article plays an important secondary role in the encyclopedia if not a primary one. Focusing on whether or not a topic is important enough without looking at the situation holistically would result in exactly the type of bad results being suggested here.