Deletion of JetBlue Airways Flight 191

Comment: I think this would meet 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Besides easily passing , it's not only willful ignorance to presume such a case will be quickly forgotten, ''Time (magazine)|Time'' published an extensive article of how this and other cases will have long term effects on US pilot training, screening monitoring laws and procedures.http://ideas.time.com/2012/04/02/the-real-lesson-of-the-jetblue-pilot-meltdown/?xid=gonewsedit
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: just reexamined the article.  There are questions to accuracy beyond speculation that Lufthansa's sale of stake was more than coincidence to the incident, but beyond that, the |sources presented bring it well beyond up to par with .  Moreover, to counter the opening argument, there is speculation that this will have a long term effect.  I'd like to reiterate my ''keep'' !vote accordingly, and motion for |snow close at this point
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:GNG||WP:SNOW)

Comment: on account of knowledge of background and results of similar cases, and a dash of |ignoring the rules - and NOT because of the date. =)  The long and short is simple: I've never heard of a pilot "snapping", as it were, in quite this fashion (which, naturally, doesn't mean it hasn't happened before), so as such, it strikes me as a unique enough scenario to warrant some notability.  On account of , given the uniqueness of this, I'm not inclined to apply it quite yet.  All this combined makes for a weak rationale on my part, therefore, ''weak'' keep.  Yes, I fully understand that my args won't hold water by themselves.  Long and short - let's let this ride out a bit before deletion
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Ignore all rules (WP:IAR||WP:NOTNEWS)