Deletion of The Ruptured Duck (B-25)

Comment: while |notability is not inherited, that does not mean that the "child" subject is automatically ''not'' notable.  Yes, this is one of 16 aircraft involved in the Doolittle raid and the other 15 do not have articles;  however, the other 15 didn't have a book written or multiple films made in which they were a central "character" (for lack of a better term).  I think there is enough here to meet the individual aircraft notability threshold
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:NOTINHERIT)

Comment: The topic meets , but the article focuses on everything but The Ruptured Duck. For example, "Doolittle chose the relatively new B-25B." - that focuses on Doolittle. A sentence "The Ruptured Duck was chosen by Doolittle" focuses on the main topic, namely, The Ruptured Duck. The section on Preparations for the Doolittle Raid should only focus on how The Ruptured Duck was prepared for the Doolittle Raid. The Origins of the name section focuses too much on Lawson and not on the plane. The Doolittle Raid section should be limited to The Ruptured Duck's role in that raid. The Crew of The Ruptured Duck should focus on the plane as well. Instead of "Ted W. Lawson was the pilot.", it should be "The Ruptured Duck was piloted by Ted W. Lawson."  Ted W. Lawson's birth date of 7 March 1917 listed in the article has no relevance to the plane. There appears to be no effort in the development of the article to focus on the plane. This has lead to using source material for its content on everything but The Ruptured Duck. I iVoted weak keep because the topic does meet  but deleting the article and starting from scratch to focus on the plane is a viable option
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:GNG)