Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aryan Cargo Express


 * 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   No consensus. CBD 17:07, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Aryan Cargo Express

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non notable cargo airline company, preliminary research suffices this fact, as it only shows links to social networks. Eduemoni↑talk↓  01:26, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Err... an article by Wall Street Journal count as link to social network? OhanaUnitedTalk page 17:26, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

<hr style="width:55%;" />
 * Comment - In-depth coverage, not substantial, even by reliable source does not establish notability. There are several factors that are required to make this article get deleted. The article provided above is a trivial and routine work focused on this company. The same way it is also written like a promotional referendum or press release. The company is likewise locally known, the article should also provide details about its services and products, because talking solely about the company makes its lack of notability ubiquitous. Also the company does not have a large lifespan, does not feature anyone known or important on its crew nor the size of the crew is large, it hasn't achieved any achievement, doesn't have any controversy historic. Well even though this is a extensive list of reasons why this article is not notable, it does not conclude anything as anyone can make a further research and expand the article accordingly, what I don't think may be possible. Because using only a reference for writing the article make it kind of a primary source. <b style="background:#FEE;padding:5px;font-size:10px"><b style="color:#913">Ed</b><b style="color:#C13">ue</b><b style="color:#D35">mo</b><b style="color:#E57">ni</b><sup style='color:green'>↑talk↓ </b> 05:30, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable airline. Keb25 (talk) 10:51, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:43, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

<hr style="width:55%;" />
 * Keep. Sufficient coverage to pass WP:GNG.--Arxiloxos (talk) 02:15, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - Google hits does not provide certainty on the inclusion of a subject on Wikipedia, not all sources from Google search are reliable or does not provide depth in its coverage. <b style="background:#FEE;padding:5px;font-size:10px"><b style="color:#913">Ed</b><b style="color:#C13">ue</b><b style="color:#D35">mo</b><b style="color:#E57">ni</b><sup style='color:green'>↑talk↓ </b> 20:50, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment. Many of the sources found by that search are reliable and do provide depth of coverage. Please comment on those particular search results rather than make a general statement about Google hits, which is irrelevant to this Google News search. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:34, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - Google News results are related to any site using meta key with blog, newsletter, feeds, it does not provide reliability. There are several community essays about it, google hits (being in any google namespace) does not prove notability, as Google test is only related toward the focus of the article (to see if the article is really what it is on wikipedia) or how popular it is. For further reference see either WP:GOOGLEHITS or WP:GOOGLETEST <b style="background:#FEE;padding:5px;font-size:10px"><b style="color:#913">Ed</b><b style="color:#C13">ue</b><b style="color:#D35">mo</b><b style="color:#E57">ni</b><sup style='color:green'>↑talk↓ </b> 00:08, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I provided the Wall Street Journal article as a way to proof notability but you seem to intentionally ignore it. <b style="color:#0000FF;">OhanaUnited</b><b style="color:green;">Talk page</b> 01:43, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I commented on it! I didn't ignore it, I read it, but the notability factor of this company seems limited. <b style="background:#FEE;padding:5px;font-size:10px"><b style="color:#913">Ed</b><b style="color:#C13">ue</b><b style="color:#D35">mo</b><b style="color:#E57">ni</b><sup style='color:green'>↑talk↓ </b> 02:27, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * And providing a valid point to this discussion regarding the google thing, is a search on google news for a deleted article that wasn't notable enough, but its result show it is popular. <b style="background:#FEE;padding:5px;font-size:10px"><b style="color:#913">Ed</b><b style="color:#C13">ue</b><b style="color:#D35">mo</b><b style="color:#E57">ni</b><sup style='color:green'>↑talk↓ </b> 02:33, 4 June 2011 (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.