Deletion of Emirates Flight 407 (3rd nomination)

Comment: Still in the news almost three years after the event (http://australianaviation.com.au/2011/12/incorrect-data-entry-led-to-emirates-tailstrike-atsb/, http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/emirates-tail-strike-crew-missed-chances-to-catch-weight-error-366472/, http://www.arabianbusiness.com/human-error-caused-emirates-near-miss-in-melbourne-435515.html from the last two months alone). Coverage is "significant, non-routine, and has persisted over a period of time" (per requirements of ). Has led Airbus to change their flight software and for airlines to introduce new procedures (ie, it ''has'' changed the world of aviation). Article has survived two previous AFDs (one keep, the other withdrawn on the way to what looked to be a solid keep) and while that's no reason not to re-nominate it if it really deserves it, if anything the claim to enduring notability has strengthened since then
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:EVENT)

Comment: the "continued coverage" is simply  reports on the conclusion of the accident investigation. While I suppose this  meets  by changes in procedures, there is ''not'' sufficient coverage to meet the  and merit an independent article. Coverage in the airline and type articles is sufficient for an accident of this (lack of) significance
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ROUTINE||WP:AIRCRASH||WP:GNG)

Comment: Doesn't meet 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)