Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gimje Airport


 * 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   redirect to Gimje, merge left to editorial discretion. lifebaka++ 15:24, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Gimje Airport

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

Canceled airport. Fails WP:N and WP:RS. Completely unsourced. Delete Undead Warrior (talk) 16:15, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Doesn't seem to be much more to say about it other than it didn't happen. No evidence that it was a major scandal or anything.  Communities plan and cancel stuff all the time.  If a source can be found, maybe this would add a sentence worth of flavour to our mostly-empty Gimje article, but definitely not an article of its own. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  16:31, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - no sources and thus WP:OR. Article is about an airport that was never built - the article states that it was recently cancelled, but Google News has nothing on it. --  JediLofty Talk to meFollow me 16:31, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge with the city article seems fair. With regard to the previous comment, it does exist (or did). There's an item about it part way down this page dated July 24, 2008. this page on the Gunsan Free Trade Zone still refers to it as if it were an active project (but I suspect it's just a stale page) MadScot666 (talk) 00:06, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge or keep. Keep the information on Wikipedia. A major public-works project is significant, and the article asserts that construction actually began on this one. Fg2 (talk) 11:42, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Korea-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  17:31, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  17:31, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep if the creator can expand the article with reliable sources during the discussion. If not, merge is suitable for the stub.--Caspian blue (talk) 18:16, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete The city article would be a good place to merge in a note about the aborted plans to build the Gimje Airport. I did a Google search.  Of course one wouldn't expect much to be in English about a non-English-speaking country.  Even so, the search found various terse mentions on construction company sites about significant airport construction about to begin and some blog posts in June and July 2008 saying it was cancelled.  It's enough info to conclude that the story is over and there won't be more sources.  (If I had found reliable sources, I'd have added them.)  It isn't enough to qualify for WP:RS as it is.  So it must go.  Ikluft (talk) 19:02, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, planned, land bought and contractor chosen is bound to have created sufficient media attention to generate amble sources (probably in Korean though). I would like to see some sources in the article to verify the claims—on the other hand being unsourced is not a criteria for deletion. Arsenikk (talk)  19:03, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Being unsourced is enough grounds for deletion. No sources confirms non notability. The creator of the article even notified me that he doesn't think it's notable. Undead Warrior (talk) 23:41, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * The author is the only one who has added any content. (One other editor added a category and an unref tag. And a bot dated the tag.) So the article would qualify for speedy deletion if the author requests it.  A db-author tag in the article by the author or a deletion request posted here is all it would take. Ikluft (talk) 04:26, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, it already does qualify for speedy deletion under G7. I see that the creator of the article gave permission to delete it on Undead warrior's talk page.  That's a step beyond saying it's not notable. Ikluft (talk) 04:30, 10 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. Here's a newspaper article from 2004: http://english.donga.com/srv/service.php3?bicode=050000&biid=2004061555758 --Eastmain (talk) 04:43, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Note to closing admin This article still contain little sourced information. There is now only one reliable source, which still fails WP:RS. The other keep votes are based off of personal opinions and not off of what is acceptable on Wikipedia. Undead Warrior (talk) 15:36, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge & redirect to Gimje, it would be better suited there as it really isn't notable enough to stand alone. RMHED (talk) 21:35, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Gimje. An airport that is not to be built with one source is not enough doktorb wordsdeeds 10:03, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to Gimje as it doesn't meet notability policy and would not be able to stand on its own. Pie is good   (Apple is the best)  14:45, 13 September 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.