Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2017 United Express passenger removal
- 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 keep. (non-admin closure) — Benison (Beni · talk) 01:49, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- 2017 United Express passenger removal (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)
No WP:LASTING effects apart of Wikipedia mirrors, thus fails WP:NOTNEWS. Protoeus (talk) 01:06, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
- Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 January 19. —cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 01:30, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
- Keep. I think this very easily passes the WP:LASTING test. It led to changes to USDOT rules, new legislation, and impacted United's financials and reputation into at least the medium term. Looking it up in Google Books and Google Scholar, it's an incident that continues to be very widely discussed in the fields of public relations and aviation law. I don't think this is a case of WP:NOTNEWS at all. MCE89 (talk) 02:41, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Police, Aviation, and Illinois. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:17, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This is not the article's first nomination; a 2022 renaming makes this less obvious. The earlier discussions were not too long after the incident, attracted many comments, and were quickly closed — Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/United Express Flight 3411 was a SNOW closure, and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/United Express Flight 3411 incident (2nd nomination) came too quickly after the first nomination and was a speedy keep. I'd expect a more reasonable discussion eight years later, though I myself have no opinion at this time. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:21, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
- Keep and strongly so. This was a major news story that clearly had a WP:LASTING effect just by looking at the sources in the article. The clearest one is the NY Times article which led with the incident four years later. SportingFlyer T·C 03:23, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
- Keep. Per the above. Far more significance than, for example, a video game article, or even an article about a notorious crime that attracts morbid interest, but has no lasting effect. DonFB (talk) 05:19, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
- Keep seems pretty clear per the above votes and the impact of DOT legislation per MCE89. Also worth noting that WP:LASTING is only one guideline for establishing notability, and articles can still be notable without having inherently lasting effects (but I would argue this one has had them). - Epluribusunumyall (talk) 06:30, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
- Keep – Passes WP:GNG and WP:NEVENT – Continued, significant, and in-depth coverage in secondary sources is present with lasting effects and changes existing as a result of this incident.[1] The incident is also the subject of numerous case studies. [1] Aviationwikiflight (talk) 09:29, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
- Keep: All sorts of significant changes were made as a result of this incident. 2600:6C46:6800:21F8:F5A6:6EDD:F4D6:C13 (talk) 19:46, 25 January 2025 (UTC)
References
- ^
- Zhang, Benjamin (13 April 2017). "United is promising to make major customer service changes". Business Insider. Retrieved 19 January 2025.
- Zhang, Benjamin (26 April 2017). "United Airlines just announced 10 major changes to avoid another violent passenger-removal incident". Business Insider. Retrieved 19 January 2025.
- Fernández, Alexia (27 April 2017). "United Airlines Announces 10 Policy Changes in Response to Passenger Removal Incident". People. Retrieved 19 January 2025.
- Zumbach, Lauren (9 April 2018). "A year after a passenger was dragged off a United flight, everyday indignities remain". The Chicago Tribune. Retrieved 19 January 2025.
- Aratani, Lori (9 April 2018). "A year after the infamous United dragging incident, has anything changed for airline travelers?". The Washington Post. Retrieved 19 January 2025.
- Bever, Lindsey (9 April 2019). "Doctor who was dragged, screaming, from United Airlines flight finally breaks silence". The Washington Post. Retrieved 19 January 2025.
- Weed, Julie (27 January 2021). "While You Weren't Looking: Revised Airline Policies May Make Flying Better". The New York Times. Retrieved 19 January 2025.
- Thomaselli, Rich (10 April 2022). "Five Years Later, What Have We Learned From United's Dr. Dao Dragging Incident?". TravelPulse. Retrieved 19 January 2025.
- Hartley, Kate (30 July 2024). "United Airlines passenger removal scandal – what can leaders learn?". Polpeo. Retrieved 19 January 2025.
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 09:32, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
Keep passes the WP: LASTING. HeMahon (talk) 10:38, 19 January 2025 (UTC)WP:SOCKSTRIKE. ✗plicit 01:05, 26 January 2025 (UTC)- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and United States of America. ThisGuy (talk • contributions) 13:02, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
- Keep: Per above. Has coverage and has lasting effects. Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 07:42, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. ThisGuy (talk • contributions) 18:41, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
- Keep. Easily passes WP:NEVENT. The entire "Responses" section has more than enough of the evidence needed. S5A-0043🚎(Leave a message here) 02:16, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
- Keep - there was significant coverage for weeks and months and years. There are people 8 years later who won't take United for any reason. Bearian (talk) 06:04, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
- Keep - Does not seem to violate any of the five key points in WP:NOTNEWS ✈ mike_gigs talkcontribs 17:19, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
- 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.