Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A.I.R Engineer


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was moved to userspace by User:Steelpillow. (Non-admin closure)  " Pepper "  @ 01:07, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

A.I.R Engineer

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Completely incomprehensible article and seems to be a POV fork of Aircraft maintenance engineer (Canada). It also seems to be part of the creator's ongoing Wikipedia campaign to raise the profile of and promote the profession he belongs to. The refs are all inaccessible and so subject cannot be verified and the article cannot be turned into an encyclopedia article by normal editing. The article was WP:PROD, but the creator removed the prod tag; the article was then redirected, but the article creator reverted the redirect, so a full AFD discussion is required. Ahunt (talk) 20:27, 6 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Note: Notification of the existence of this AfD has been made at WikiProject Aviation and WikiProject Aircraft, within whose scope this article falls. - Ahunt (talk) 20:32, 6 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete not really encyclopedic just a clumpsy way of defining a term by dumping text from the sources, it may be worth a one-liner in Aircraft Maintenance Engineer but as that article is a bit of a disaster it might be hard to add anything that makes sense. MilborneOne (talk) 20:54, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 21:16, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 21:16, 6 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete Not an article, more like a list of facts from various obscure sources. Properly referenced some information could be added to Air Board (Canada). Samf4u (talk) 21:25, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as a sequence of phrases that do not come close to comprising an article. The topic itself may be notable but appears to be covered already at Aircraft maintenance engineer (Canada). Rebb  ing  21:34, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete . WP:Original research. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:54, 7 August 2016 (UTC)


 * DO NOT Delete read talk page - pls. CanadianAME (talk) 01:07, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete This is neither an encyclopedia article nor an essay, but rather a dump of quotes from various obscure sources over the past century. Other articles mentioned above already cover this topic. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  02:29, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Graham (talk) 07:02, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Old comment: Move to Draft or User space with a view to merging with Aircraft maintenance engineer (Canada) . To take the proposer's points in order. AME and AIR are different qualifications, so a different article is not unreasonable. The two articles were initiated by the same editor, so I don't see this as a "PoV fork". A merge might be in order eventually, but this article is not yet in a fit state. If a profession is under-represented on Wikipedia then a campaign to raise its profile can hardly be faulted. In this context there has been a long-running international standards battle over the status of some of these professional qualifications and any non-US position may well deserve its profile raising here to match. Personally I do not prejudge this issue either way, rather, I am hoping that these articles will one day enlighten me. The refs appear to be genuine and cannot be argued down on grounds of inaccessibility, see WP:SOURCEACCESS. So, while the present state is unpublishable I do not think it should be summarily deleted. An earlier article in a similar position was moved to Draft:Aircraft maintenance personnel in Britain, where work is slowly progressing. There is no harm in having several such drafts in progress, though I am now wondering whether user space might be better, for example User:CanadianAME/AIR Engineer. CanadianAME may be alone on Wikipedia but he is not alone in the world and, however difficult his raw material might be to digest, his referencing technique is already beginning to improve under (I like to think) my guidance.  I believe we should be helping and encouraging rather than blanking. &mdash; Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 10:35, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete: Following conversation with the originator, I have moved the article to User:CanadianAME/AIR Engineer where it can be attended to at leisure. We are left here with an incorrectly punctuated redirect, but restarting over with a Redirect for Deletion process would be bureaucracy gone mad. &mdash; Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 17:06, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: The now-redirect is eligible for speedy deletion under criterion R2 as a cross-namespace redirect; no further discussion, here or at RFD, should be necessary to remove it. Rebb  ing  17:26, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
 * NOTE: the article has been moved to user space and all redirects cleaned up, so this AfD is really moot at this point. The debate can now be closed, although I don't think it should be me that formally closes it. Thank you to everyone for participating and coming to a consensus that the article needed to be moved out of mainspace. - Ahunt (talk) 22:15, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
 * It has indeed been speedily deleted. I also am too involved to be the closer. &mdash; Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 08:38, 8 August 2016 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.