Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blue1 destinations


 * 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 keep. (non-admin closure) power~enwiki ( π, ν ) 05:28, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Blue1 destinations

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article, unreferenced for a decade, appears to be original research. A WP:BEFORE search turned up no reliable sources. Rhadow (talk) 13:20, 23 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep I'm getting sick and tired of these nominations by the same user. Consensus is these articles are notable. AFD is not cleanup. Enough, or we'll have to take this to WP:ANI. Smartyllama (talk) 13:26, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 13:33, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 13:33, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finland-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 13:33, 23 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep -- There are hundreds of these articles, all supported by the Aviation WikiProject. While I understand that that in itself is not a reason for keeping this particular article, it does indicate that there's a larger problem that will not be solved by this capricious and isolated nomination.  I suggest that the nominator withdraw this AfD and get with appropriate stakeholders to try to convince them that none of these "destination" articles ought to be kept.  Until there's a broad discussion leading to some kind of consensus, this individual nomination is nothing more than disruption. 192.160.216.52 (talk) 15:21, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment: This editor has been nominating bunches of these destination articles for deletion. One of them evidently did get deleted but that decision was overturned at deletion review to keep.  It's worth reading that discussion and the AfD discussion it was based on to see the extent of the disruption here.  Nom ought to withdraw this and all other similar deletion discussions and try to gain consensus.  This is a waste of everyone's time. 192.160.216.52 (talk) 15:42, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment -- We just concluded in a DRV that Airline destinations, as a group, are notable. That's fine. Of the 455 articles are a small subset that fail WP:V. This nomination is neither isolated nor capricious, to wit: Flybe franchise and codeshare destinations, Holidays Czech Airlines destinations, and Skyservice destinations.
 * Keep per the outcome at the DRV discussion. Blue1 is an airline with regular services, and all you have to do is source the article. Deletion is not an option.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 18:27, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep I even partially sourced the article very quickly. I agree with Smartyllama - Rhadow did bring a couple good deletions in these categories in my opinion (such as the list of codeshares, or defunct charter airlines that would be impossible to source properly) but on the whole this is a giant waste of time. SportingFlyer (talk) 18:34, 23 February 2018 (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.