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. Wizardman 02:07, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of passengers forced to leave an air flight due to behaviour[edit]

List of passengers forced to leave an air flight due to behaviour (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

This article has been put on CSD twice which both have been removed, I am nominating this for the reason that this article will never be completed as people do get thrown out of air flight due to any behaviour anyway, not to mention that to list every one will take forever Knock-Off Nigel (talk) 22:41, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Firstly, it doesn't matter that the list will never be completed, since nothing on Wikipedia is ever complete. Isn't working toward a deadline. Just like the List of Countries will never be complete, the numerous List of Films will never be complete, and the List of Youtube Celebrities will never be complete, this will never be complete. Secondly, while this should probably be a category with an accompanying list, this is fine, sourcable and verifiable as long as only notable people are included. Celarnor ^{Talk to me} 22:53, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  I want to point out that getting thrown off a plane is a common occurrence and plus none of these listed do have their articles. Therefore I am nominating this for the reason of common occurrence, also I have seen people who have being thrown off a plane due to behaviour and do most of these get in the news, many of them don't. Knock-Off Nigel (talk) 23:03, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me? please, back "getting thrown off a plane is a common occurrence" with a ((fact)) Exit2DOS2000^•T•C• 02:40, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's actually pretty common in the United States, mostly post-9/11. Myself, I was refused from being allowed to board because I had a multimeter in my carry-on. I don't know if that counts as being thrown off, but it's not as far-fetched as you might think, especially in the Big Brother state that the US is becoming. Celarnor ^{Talk to me} 03:20, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So your saying that because it happened to you (for a dumb reason), its "pretty common", no. How many persons flew in an airplane in that year, in all countries combined (or if you prefer, the US alone). Now, if you can find a statistic for removed passengers that makes it into the "pretty common" range (10-20%) then I might believe your statement. We cannot allow our own personal experiences, to cloud the real picture. Exit2DOS2000^•T•C• 04:38, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Getting in the news doesn't make them notable or worthy of inclusion. Already being notable, and this happening to them does. For an example, read up on the Flying Imams controversy. Omar Shahin is notable, has an article, and was thrown off an air flight 'due to behavior'. Also, why does what you, personally, have seen matter? It happens all the time; the people involved aren't necessarily notable. Celarnor ^{Talk to me} 23:10, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete — the threshold for inclusion is very low, bordering on indiscriminate. It can't be a category because an overwhelming majority of the list will not be notable. --Haemo (talk) 23:55, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Categorify - these people would be the equal of any person trespassed from any properety. If they rate an Article (that survives the WP:BLP1E horizon) then add them to a a more manageable Category, rather than a List. Exit2DOS2000^•T•C• 02:37, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename Barring airline passengers from flights, a complementary article to Air rage. It's a notable enough topic. Just listing otherwise non-notable passengers violates WP:ONEEVENT, and the current article doesn't even list any anyway. There's an article in there somewhere, screaming to be allowed on board Wikipedia Flight 101. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:46, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete A person qualifies for inclusion on this list for being the subject of a very minor news event. This doesn't work as a category either, per Haemo. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 05:15, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete This would be a list of non-notable people who got mentioned in the media after they were alleged to have missbehaved. As such, it clearly violates WP:BLP. --Nick Dowling (talk) 08:46, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Not really a BLP problem since the list keeps the names anonymous, but I agree with Ice Cold Beer, these events are generally minor news stories. Significant cases with landmark legal consequences, such as the case of an Arabic-looking man being denied passage without any cause in the wake of 9/11, are covered in other articles, but this does not justify a list. Sjakkalle (Check!) 11:37, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete This looks like it would essentially be a press review on news items connected to the topic, but WP:NOT#NEWS. Also the title would be wrong as it would not list passengers but incidents. --Minimaki (talk) 11:52, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. People who might be included would almost universally be not-notable and non-encyclopedic. WP:NOT an indiscriminate collection of information. KleenupKrew (talk) 22:35, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep or, better, merge to Air rage - notable subjects and reffed incidents add to latter article. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:43, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep per Wikipedia:Lists (it is a discrminate and referenced list) and Wikipedia:Give an article a chance (the article is only a couple of weeks old and has improved since then). Moreover, the nominator has been confirmed to be operating socks. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 23:15, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as news by other means. Eusebeus (talk) 12:02, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Combining multiple sources from newspapers does not automatically make this article news. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 16:43, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as lists of WP:BLP1E violations are not encyclopaedic. Notable cases are few enough that there's no justification for a list or category. Sheffield Steel^talk_stalk 15:55, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • As an alternative, what if we merged and redirected without deleting to Air rage? Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 17:33, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. The current content doesn't match the title, but if it did it would be a list of WP:BLP1E violations. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 06:40, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Then in the worst case scenario, we would merge and redirect without deleting to Air rage in order to keep the contribution history public. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 16:34, 12 April 2008 (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.