Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Aviation

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Aviation. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Aviation|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Aviation. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

• WikiProject Deletion sorting/Aviation/archive

watch

Aviation Articles for Deletion (WP:AFD)

Caspian Airlines Flight 6936

AfDs for this article:

• Articles for deletion/Caspian Airlines Flight 6936
• Articles for deletion/Caspian Airlines Flight 6936 (2nd nomination)

Caspian Airlines Flight 6936 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Tag me in the below discussion so i can get my quickest reponse possible out to you.

Failure of WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE and WP:NOTNEWS incident seems to have had a fairly short news cycle. Additionally no passenger or exterior fatalities and only a total loss of the plane. Lolzer3k 15:42, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Aviation, and Iran. Lolzer3k 15:42, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

• Speedy keep - per my comments at the 1st AfD discussion, a mere 2 months ago. A second AfD is not justified at this point in time. Mjroots (talk) 18:41, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete per criteria 4 of WP:EVENTCRIT. Oppose a speedy close. This was a minor accident with zero fatalities and only two people with minor injuries. There is nothing encyclopedic about this event. We need to see WP:SUSTAINED coverage in multiple kinds of sources to prove long-term significance. Wikipedia is WP:NOTNEWS. FYI We've had bus and plane crashes with multiple deaths get deleted in the past for this reason. Many vehicular accidents of all kinds happen every day around the world. We don't include them unless they have lasting significance that is not WP:ROUTINE news coverage immediately after the event.4meter4 (talk) 23:25, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Shelby County Airport (Missouri)

Shelby County Airport (Missouri) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I ran across this trying to source unreferenced Missouri articles for the ongoing unreferenced articles drive. While the essay WP:NAIRPORT suggests that municipal general aviation airports are likely to be notable, that essay does not carry the weight of policy and I'm not finding any substantial coverage for this at all. This from MODOT looks substantive at first, but actually only 4 sentences is about this airport and the rest is about general aviation in the state as a whole. Newspapers.com searching in Missouri for this airport turns up coverage of airports in Alabama and Memphis, but only a statement that a large crowd turned out for a BBQ pork dinner about this airport and a second brief statement announcing a fly-in at the airport in 1961. I know these municipal airports are usually notable, but I don't see a WP:GNG pass here due to the only coverage a fairly thorough WP:BEFORE is bringing up that isn't registration-type listings are the four sentences from MODOT and the two one-sentence passing mentions. The NAIRPORT essay does not carry the weight of policy. Hog Farm _Talk 05:40, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Aviation, Transportation, and Missouri. Hog Farm _Talk 05:40, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep. WP:5P establishes that Wikipedia is a gazetteer, and airports are a standard part of such works. WP:V is the guiding line beyond that, and that is satisfied. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 06:01, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
• Redirect to Shelby County as an ATD. BTW, Wikipedia is not a Gazetteer (yes, I know it's an essay but still) and WP:GEOLAND tells us that artificial features related to infrastructure need to pass WP:GNG which this does not. So if the redirect target doesn't work for folks, then delete... Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 07:37, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
• Redirect to List of airports in Missouri, which is a much better target than the county itself. There's just the bare minimum of information about this unattended turf runway that I could find, but I think we're just a source away from being able to restore it if someone comes across this later. SportingFlyer T·C 20:02, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

  Agree on this, din't know it was there. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 06:14, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

• Redirect per Sportingflyer and Alexandermcnabb. I agree that List of airports in Missouri currently appears to be the best target that allows us to get the most information to the reader. I suppose there's a non-zero chance this may prove to be notable, but I'm also not convinced it warrants a stand-alone page when we have a fully functioning list we can add the information to. If a future editor does end up expanding the articles on Shelbyville, Missouri or Shelby County, Missouri and finds that they have enough for more than two sentences on the airport, then I have no objection to changing the redirect target. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 22:23, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
• Merge and redirect to Shelby County per previous comments. While WP:NAIRPORT says that municipal airports are "likely" to be notable, WP:NBUILD is a better policy to follow in my estimation, and this airport is not mentioned in secondary sources aside from cursory and WP:ROTM mentions in aviation databases and local news. For what it's worth, I've been AFDing and PRODing obscure Texas airports on an on-off-but-mostly-off basis, and it doesn't take much to establish notability—features in aviation magazines or local news stories that focus on the airport will do it—but this airport doesn't seem to reach even this low bar. Carguychris (talk) 22:44, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
  • Carguychris - I tend to think that this would be better handled at the article for whatever governmental entity operates the airport. In this case, the article states that the airport is operated by the City of Shelbyville, Missouri. What are your thoughts on this? Hog Farm _Talk 23:46, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

    That makes sense. I didn't notice that. Carguychris (talk) 17:15, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

    Agree. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 04:27, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. There seems to be a consensus to Redirect but we have two different target articles proposed. We have to get that down to ONE.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:30, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

2024 New Way Cargo Airlines Ilyushin Il-76 shootdown

AfDs for this article:

• Articles for deletion/2024 New Way Cargo Airlines Ilyushin Il-76 shootdown (3rd nomination)

2024 New Way Cargo Airlines Ilyushin Il-76 shootdown (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Per WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE and WP:NOTNEWS although notable at first sustained coverage died off quick. There has been no expanded reports on the incident. A crash of a heavy aircraft with fatalities under 10 has no notability in itself.

@ me in the below discussion when you comment so i can get the fastest response or see your comment ASAP. Lolzer3k 03:10, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Military, Aviation, and Sudan. Lolzer3k 03:10, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete - Not a scheduled flight or a passenger flight (these are generally considered automatically notable), and it appears to have been a military flight or military-operated flight, in which case a shootdown isn't notable, it's fortunes of war. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 06:04, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete - I created this article when it was said that this was a civilian cargo plane, but since now it is practiacally confirmed it was a military one, and since no important figures were killed, and there were no particular consequences nor continued coverage I think we Can delete it. - SignorPignolini _Talk 06:31, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. I was going to suggest a merge but I see there's already a brief, but sufficient, mention at the bottom of the Sudanese civil war (2023–present) § United Arab Emirates section. Rosbif73 (talk) 07:12, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Jay D. Easy (t) 20:49, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete per norm. EBLDP (talk) 14:56, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
• Weak keep This won't be kept, but the only issue with it is really that the coverage window was too close in time to the accident. Articles like this show that there may be further coverage, in which case I would have absolutely no problem restoring this article. SportingFlyer T·C 20:05, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep – The event has received significant in-depth coverage in secondary sources that currently justify its retention. It's too soon to determine whether the event will have sustained continued coverage or lasting effects. Sources: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aviationwikiflight (talk • contribs) 15:10, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

References

• Keep: I believe this event meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines:

1. Significance: The incident involves a military aircraft, and any military engagements resulting in casualties often have broader implications for regional stability and/or international relations. This particular event is noteworthy given the ongoing issues Sudan is facing.
2. Media Coverage: There has been significant media coverage of the incident, which explains what happened in the incident thoroughly. Reliable sources have reported on the details of the event. Some citations which I easily found are here, here, here, and here that discuss the incident in detail.
3. Aviation Context: This incident is part of a bigger story about military planes that have accidents in war zones. Adding it to Wikipedia helps people understand the dangers and problems that military aircraft deal with. Also, I don't think heavy military aircraft, like the Il-76, involved in shoot-downs is ordinary. They do have significant information.

Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 05:36, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 05:43, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

• Weak Keep There's nothing WP:ROUTINE about this story or its coverage. Per Hacked, this article details a significant event, for which there has been WP:SIGCOV. Although the coverage seems to have died down, it think it's still too soon for deletion.--DesiMoore (talk) 16:03, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Adani Enterprises

AfDs for this article:

• Articles for deletion/Adani Enterprises
• Articles for deletion/Adani Enterprises (2nd nomination)

Adani Enterprises (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article is essentially a fork of Adani Group and provides no new information. The past AfD had only two votes and one of them was a sock and another an UPE who have been blocked, refer to this for more information. Ratnahastin (talk) 14:15, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Ratnahastin (talk) 14:15, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

  Delete, I agree with Ratnahastin. A lot of WP: CONTENTFORKING is there in article. It is a WP:REDUNDANTFORK actually.Adamantine123 (talk) 15:47, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Gujarat-related deletion discussions. Skynxnex (talk) 15:48, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, News media, Television, Technology, Aviation, Internet, and Transportation. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:18, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep I don't see any evidence of redundant content fork here. Adani Enterprises is the largest company within the much broader Adani Group. In its own right, Adani Enterprises meets WP:LISTED as it is part of the NIFTY 50 index of the 50 largest Indian companies and has received significant coverage in international media [1], Indian media [2], and analyst reports [3] independent of the parent. This page appears to have passed the WP:AFC review legitimately in 2021. Concerns about paid edits should be addressed by cleaning up the problematic content, instead of deleting pages on otherwise highly notable topics. Yuvaank (talk) 17:15, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
• Redirect to Adani Group: as an WP:ATD. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:03, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep Agreed with Yuvaank, Clrealy meets WP:NCORP, WP:LISTED, WP:SIGCOV, WP:RS. Also already survived from previous AfD. Vofavy (talk) 16:15, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Those sources fail WP:NEWSORGINDIA and they don't say why do we need an "Adani Enterprises" when we have Adani Group. Dympies (talk) 16:26, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete pure content fork especially when we already have an article on Adani Group. Dympies (talk) 16:26, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep Seriously, i can't believe how can someone mark such notable companies for deletion. I mean on what ground? Adani is one of the most notable companies in India, easily passes WP:NCORP. See the notices and warnings on nominator's talk page which has been deleted by the user. B-Factor (talk) 16:46, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

• See WP:ILIKEIT and WP:ASPERSIONS. Dympies (talk) 17:21, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A better and deeper source evaluation is needed on the presented ones. Kindly note that keep !votes should provide proper rationale supported by reliable sources denoting notability and SIGCOV. Additionally, kindly address the need of the article when another similarly titled article already exists.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Benison (talk) 19:56, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

• Comment to address Dympies's comment above which seems to suggest we discount the sources presented by me on the basis of WP:NEWSORGINDIA: The Financial Times is not even an Indian news organization to begin with and is widely-regarded as one of the highest-quality sources for business-related topics. The Ken is pretty credible too as there is no evidence of paid reporting by them. The HDFC Securities analyst report satisfies WP:LISTED. These sources, along with it being part of NIFTY 50, establish this company's notability independent of the parent group umbrella. It is worth considering WP:SIZE of the Adani Group page before advocating for a merge/redirect. I'm also yet to see any evidence of content fork besides sweeping assertions. Yuvaank (talk) 14:27, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
• Redirect is a reasonable solution to deleting a bad article that is a fork of a company - but is also a real subsidiary. We don’t need articles about every subsidiary of even the largest companies. Bearian (talk) 17:27, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
• Redirect - One more article on the same topic is unnecessary. Agletarang (talk) 12:26, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep The two companies possess distinct prospects. These are dissimilar. Citations are sufficient to satisfy WP:SIGCOV and hence fulfill WP:NCORP. I believe that discussing the references could be more advantageous. And agree with Yuvaank. Bakhtar40 (talk) 07:34, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
• Redirect to Adani Group. It is not possible to maintain this page without making it look like a content fork of a broader article. CharlesWain (talk) 08:02, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep Adani Group and Adani Enterprises are distinctly separate entities, and there is no basis for merging the two. After this extensive discussion and consensus on the Talk page, See Talk:Adani Group and the closure of the initial Articles for Deletion (AfD), the page has remained live. It is concerning that, despite these discussions, there are still proposals to merge the pages. The page meets all necessary policies to justify its independence.Kevarove (talk) 12:29, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

  Avoid WP:STONEWALLING and read WP:CCC. - Ratnahastin (talk) 13:33, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep Did not find any evidence of content fork. Received independent coverage.Lalu Faizy (talk) 18:35, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
• Merge with Adani Group Adani Enterprises is often synonymous with Adani Group in most media coverage. Also, a closer look at the content shows that the subsidiaries listed on the Adani Enterprises page overlap with those listed as affiliated companies on the Adani Group page, which reduces the value of maintaining two separate pages. Merging them would be the most effective way to retain the key aspects of Adani Enterprises. Charlie (talk) 05:21, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep: Notable company in its own right, with significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. While there is overlap with the Adani Group article, there is also unique information here that justifies keeping the article separate.Regemoso (talk) 07:27, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Ersel Göral

Ersel Göral (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

BLP of a successful businessman who has had a career in airport management. Nothing here indicates notability. A draft also exists. Mccapra (talk) 22:00, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey. Mccapra (talk) 22:00, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:04, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
• Weak keep: There seems to be some coverage in the Turkish media, sufficiently spread out in time, and can be considered above the WP:SIGCOV threshold: [4], [5], [6], [7], [8] TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 02:04, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
• Delete. Contra TheJoyfulTentmaker, these sources are routine coverage (often press release-based) of hiring or WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS of him in the context of significant coverage of an airport where he works. I don't see any evidence of passing WP:GNG or WP:NBIO. Dclemens1971 (talk) 04:03, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:21, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:15, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete non notable business executive. All four references in the article are from primary sources. Google search returned nothing of significance for their notability. This no doubt fails WP:GNG and WP: ANYBIO regardless of their career success. Mekomo (talk) 11:32, 12 November 2024 (UTC)