Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Heli USA


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 00:15, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Heli USA

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

Non-notable company with very little coverage in third-party sources. Also reads like spam. Jeremiah (talk) 04:45, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete This is pretty spammy - in fact, it could be deleted by G11 - Fastily (talk) 07:45, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Delete spam and document the helicopter crashes they've been involved in. --  Chzz  ►  08:36, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I've now added that info. It sits great with the 'safety' spam. --  Chzz  ►  08:58, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I've deleted or edited the material that read like spam. That, with your edits and the sourcing, makes me think it's now a keep. Jeremiah (talk) 19:14, 3 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.  -- the wub  "?!"  14:46, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete If the crashes are notable enough, perhaps they should be added to the appropriate list in Category:Helicopter accidents or Category:Aviation accidents and incidents but the company lacks sufficient notability.--Rtphokie (talk) 22:47, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 00:08, 8 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete Non notable and spam like. I would even suggest G11 or A7 to be in order.  §hawn poo   05:53, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete (but borderline) - It's almost the reverse of advertising (would you fly with them after reading that?) Deb (talk) 19:48, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Surely two fatal helicopter crashes is notable? Originally the article was nominated for deletion as spam; I added that info on the crashes - which is brief at the moment, but could easily be expanded. I'd argue that a heli company with 2 crashes is notable, and the article could be expanded to give further details. The spam has been removed, so I'm a bit puzzled as to what criterion it's now being considered for deletion? --  Chzz  ►  08:22, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep - nominator states above that they recommend keeping --  Chzz  ►  08:26, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Declined, as there are delete !vote in the discussion. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:55, 11 March 2009 (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.