Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Royal Canadian Air Force squadrons


 * 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 keep. - Mailer Diablo 22:23, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

List of Royal Canadian Air Force squadrons
This article should be deleted since its a list.Qrc2006 18:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Being a list isn't criteria for deletion, Please read WP:LIST. List seems useful enough to keep. VegaDark 19:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. We have List of United States Air Force squadrons, which is an extremely useful resource, and there's no reason not to have one for our 51st state (JK!). Akradecki 19:28, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep &mdash; Notable information; encyclopedic; limited, well-defined list. &mdash; RJH (talk) 19:44, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. I'm gonna assume good faith, but nomination is clearly not based on policy. - Mgm|(talk) 19:53, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - I know a lot of people in AfD believe list is a criterion for deletion, but it's not. WP:LIST WilyD 20:45, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep One of the more useful lists on wikipedia, there is a big difference between listcruft and lists. -- pm_shef 21:31, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure this meets any criterion for speedy keeping. WilyD 21:38, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - valid and useful information; being a list is no reason for deletion. Careful, Akradecki, or we'll have our highly trained ground-attack squadrons (the ones with long necks, webbed feet and internal WMD generators) dive-bomb your car. Tony Fox (arf!) 21:41, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Valid list, doesn't need to be deleted. -Royalguard11TalkDesk 00:24, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - valid page, being a list is no reason for deletion. --Wakemp 02:01, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - a real low point in the anti-listers' behavior. Carlossuarez46 20:06, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - List is useful and valid. - BrianC 22:47, 11 September 2006 (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.