Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Criticism against Norwegian Air International Limited


 * 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   delete. § FreeRangeFrog croak 17:26, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Criticism against Norwegian Air International Limited

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A separation of just the criticism out of the main article, creating a heavily unbalanced WP:POVFORK. Material should be reintegrated into the main article, and that article better organized along topics rather than lumping all the criticism together. Nat Gertler (talk) 00:11, 16 June 2014 (UTC)


 * strong delete looks like someone's crusade against the airline. a heavily unbalanced WP:POVFORK as the nom says. LibStar (talk) 00:55, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * delete No apparent need for this article Shii (tock) 01:22, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:42, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:42, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:42, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:42, 16 June 2014 (UTC)


 * strong delete as per nom. A personal crusade massaged to look like NPOV!!--Petebutt (talk) 02:14, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete Could never pass WP:NPOV. Needs NPOV reintegration, per nom. &mdash;Lucas Thoms, formerly My Ubuntu (talk) 03:10, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Reintegrate the criticism section into the main article, but in a more focused way. Criticism of the airline's labor structure is encyclopedic, but I'm not convinced that criticism of their flight delays is; nevertheless, both are mixed together here without any particular organization. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:13, 16 June 2014 (UTC)´
 * Keep Rather copy referenced sections back to main NLH article as this has been the main topic regarding Norwegian Air Shuttle in the newspapers in the Nordic countries for the last year. JHZ94 09:31, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete - As a POV coatrack. A proportionate criticism section in the main corporate article is appropriate. Note also Timbo's Rule No. 14: "Whenever you see multiple stacked footnotes in a lead to document a subject phrase as encyclopedic, it probably isn't." — "On the other hand, the airline continues to receive extensive criticism for its lack of care for their passengers suffering from numerous and prolonged flight delays.[4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14]" Carrite (talk) 18:34, 18 June 2014 (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.