Deletion of West Air Sweden Flight 294

Comment: appears to meet  with a number of the references being |reliable.  Although, agree with nom that wp is |not news. could
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:RS||WP:NOTNEWS)

Comment: Per some of the arguments above, some of the following may need to be remembered. |Wikipedia is not the news, and  |Wikipedia is not a memorial; nor is |Wikipedia a crystal ball. "|It's notable" is not an argument that carries weight unless it's explained ''how'' it is notable; "|it's important" is, likewise, a long-established |argument to avoid. Please, when arguing for this article to be kept, make ''policy-based'' arguments that explain ''how'' this accident is notable. Saying simply that it's notable because it's important and/or that it's notable because it's a tragedy do not help in establishing a policy-based consensus on whether or not this article should be kept or deleted. If you make a calm, reasoned explanation of your position, you're more likely to change peoples' minds and win support for your position; if you ''can't'', then (put simply) you're not very likely to do either of those at all
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS||WP:NOTMEMORIAL||WP:CRYSTAL||WP:ITSNOTABLE||WP:ITSIMPORTANT||WP:ATA)

Comment: Fatal aviation crashes of cargo flights are almost invariably ''not'' kept, as they are not notable. Alas, they happen regularly enough that they are only notable if they were of airliners, cause a large stir in regulations from their consequences, or otherwise manage to demonstrate . The first is a resounding "no", the second doesn't look likely and |can't be assumed to be otherwise, and the third is . What we're left with is a burst of news coverage that, in this day and electronic age, is ''not'' enough to pass 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PERSISTENCE||WP:CRYSTAL||WP:TOOSOON||WP:GNG)