Deletion of Lufthansa Flight 592

Comment: per''  and  as well as (obviously) .  Not only has the coverage been way beyond the scope of "routine" (sports events, wedding announcements), but in addition to the long term coverage found by Lambian, it was very easy for me to find more coverage years after the event. http://books.google.com/books?id=HlFXrXcq9X4C&lpg=PA26&vq=lufthansa%201993&dq=lufthansa%20hijacking%201993&pg=PA26#v=snippet&q=lufthansa%201993&f=falsehttp://books.google.com/books?id=uojaAAAAMAAJ&q=lufthansa+hijacking+1993&dq=lufthansa+hijacking+1993&hl=en&sa=X&ei=-_98T8SfD-rWiAK7jt3LDQ&ved=0CEQQ6AEwAghttp://books.google.com/books?id=ukrJPi7uktYC&pg=PA213&dq=lufthansa+hijacking+1993&hl=en&sa=X&ei=-_98T8SfD-rWiAK7jt3LDQ&ved=0CE8Q6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=lufthansa%20hijacking%201993&f=false
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS||WP:PERSISTENCE||WP:GNG)

Comment: As an ''aviation accident'' this fails the relevant standards, but as a ''crime'' I believe it passes notablity. Note that the negiotator's handling of the incident is held up as an example in a 2011 book by the Harvard Business Review (http://books.google.com/books?id=KyvqhaX8xksC&pg=PA113&dq=Lufthansa+%22Flight+592%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Ksd4T43ZBsq2twfgl4ztDg&ved=0CD0Q6AEwAA), it is also mentioned in several recent books on terrorism, including Oxford's ''Terrorism: Documents of International and Local Control'' series. I believe there is sufficent evicence to demonstrate that the  is met
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)