Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jhonlin Air Transport


 * 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. JohnCD (talk) 17:27, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Jhonlin Air Transport

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Private airline with 3 aircraft (all of which are small anyway) and 4 destinations. Fails WP:GNG and WP:ORG. Luke no 94 (tell Luke off here) 18:56, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Indonesia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:15, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:15, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:15, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:15, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Most airlines are private companies...the size of aircraft is and the number of destinations are irrelevant. - The Bushranger One ping only 03:34, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
 * How is it irrelevant? Maybe the private bit is, but an airline with a small number of small aircraft, flying to a small number of locations, is unlikely to get any kind of automatic notability. And that's ignoring the fact that the airline fails GNG and ORG. Luke no 94  (tell Luke off here) 07:14, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
 * The question is, does it operate on a scheduled service? If it does, per WP:CONSENSUS established through past AfD results, it's notable (provided it passes WP:V through WP:RS, of course) regardless of its size, as operating a scheduled airline service establishes notability. - The Bushranger One ping only 18:06, 26 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete. Whether an airline operates scheduled services is not relevant. As a company, WP:ORG must be passed in order to be notable for being included into Wikipedia. Yes, articles of scheduled airlines tend to survive AfDs, but that's mostly because these companies usually enjoy a higher grade of media coverage. I would like to point out that there are not any special inclusion criteria for airlines. There had been an effort, but the discussion was closed as no consensus. Therefore, the question about Jhonlin Air Transport is simply if it has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. And I cannot find any. It seems to be a subsidiary of Jhonlin Group (a coal business), operating in-house corporate charter flights. In my opinion, it's useless to keep an article about a subsidiary without having one about the parent company. In case Jhonlin Group was created, the airline could be mentioned there. Something similar was done with JS Air.--FoxyOrange (talk) 07:51, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, the discussion closed as no consensus; therefore, WP:CONSENSUS defaults to consensus as established through normal editing, which has established that airlines that operate scheduled services are notable because they operate scheduled services. (Also, WP:USELESS; the lack of an article on a parent company isn't reason to delete.) - The Bushranger One ping only 04:56, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Bushranger, please have a look at WikiProject Airlines/Notability. "Per the discussion on the talk page, there is not a specific inclusion criterion for small airlines, Notability (organizations and companies) is sufficient, there is no specific threshold that can be used to automatically determine if an airline is notable or not." This is the consensus I'm referring to.--FoxyOrange (talk) 06:32, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Also, if FoxyOrange is correct, and it is an in-house airline used by this company only, then it doesn't really match those regular passenger airlines that occasionally get kept at AfD. Also, I've seen quite a lot get deleted anyway, some being bigger than this. Luke no 94  (tell Luke off here) 07:01, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete Unable to find significant coverage in any reliable sources independent of the subject. Fails WP:GNG and WP:ORG. J04n(talk page) 11:27, 3 May 2013 (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.