Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Future chinese big plane


 * 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   speedy delete for lack of context. The article does not even identify or define the topic itself. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 05:04, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Future chinese big plane

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

vauge, no title, no set date, no information Samuell Lift me up or put me down 02:09, 4 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete this is too vague for inclusion, and also fails WP:CRYSTAL Ohconfucius (talk) 02:22, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete; more appropriate as a few sentences in an article about Chinese commercial aircraft development. A2Kafir (and...?) 02:25, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as crystal-balling. Not gonna lie, the title makes me laugh when I say it in an accent. "Hey look! Future Chinese big plane! Run!" Spell4yr (talk) 03:17, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment It could be sung to the tune of Steve Miller's song, Big Ol' Jet Airliner... "Oh oh oh, Future Chinese Big Plane, don't carry me too far away...." Mandsford (talk) 04:13, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as crystal-balling. Might also qualify for an A1 since it had insufficient context. Alexius08 is welcome to talk about his contributions. 03:42, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep,there are plenty of future weapons in the category Category:Future aircraft carriers,such as Future Canadian amphibious assault ship--Ksyrie(Talkie talkie) 03:49, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete A 150-person plane with 100-ton capacity isn't big in the regular context of a jumbo jet, too vague.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 04:17, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete until it has something resembling a name. WillOakland (talk) 04:22, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment if kept this definitely needs a rename. "Future big Chinese plane" is a horrible title. Perhaps Future Chinese small passenger jetliner or Future Chinese mid-sized passenger aircraft. 70.51.8.112 (talk) 04:38, 4 June 2008 (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.