Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of early flying machines


 * 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   merge to Early flight. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:37, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

List of early flying machines

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

Considerable overlap with Early flight and First flying machine, all of which suffer from an unclear definition of what a "flying machine" is. This gives them particularly in their early, pre-18/19th century parts rather the character of a dump area for poorly justified claims. I nominated the list for deletion as the lists in the other two articles (Early flight and First flying machine (19th century)) appear to be more competently written, but a merge may be ultimately a better idea. In any case, without a proper and well-referenced definition of what a flying machine is, none of the articles has a raison d'etre here. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 09:24, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 12:19, 3 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 13:42, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 13:42, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 13:42, 3 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete or Merge to Early flight. There appear to be numerous overlaps between the lists in List of early flying machines and Early flight already, so a "Merge" is, to some degree, already in place. Both articles have almost zero citations for their claims, however the articles on each specific "aviator" generally have some citations. Many of these are, however, dubious. In any case, the Early flight section already does what List of early flying machines attempts to do, but as a part of a better written and more extensive article. I would personally say that List of early flying machines should be deleted because of similarities/overlap with Early flight and per WP:INDISCRIMINATE. However, if a Merge is to be undertaken, I believe that only list entries that satisfy one of two requirements be added to Early flight. A: The list entry has reliable citations; or B: it has its own Wikipedia article, and that article has reliable citations. Currently, List of early flying machines contains numerous entries which are red links and have no citations, and these do not need to be kept in the event of a Merge.  Neil   Clancy  16:45, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect per Neil Clancy's reasoning. Uncited redlinks should not be merged. Thryduulf (talk) 23:49, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep and merge the table from the article into here. This one does it better, and the other can then be a longer discussion in general. The refs are in the original articles, and can either be considered adequate enough, or copied. DGG (talk) 23:59, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Which article? Gun Powder Ma (talk) 20:34, 4 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Merge per Neil Clancy. Niteshift36 (talk) 04:57, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge -- The table in Early flight appears fuller, but has become rather too complicated. I wonder whether the answer might be to merge a simplification of that table here.  The redlinks for articles on the machine are often accompanied by a blue link on the inventor.  In most cases the inventor is probably not notable for much else; accordingly, separate articles on the machines are probably not needed and should be de-linked.  Peterkingiron (talk) 23:00, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge -- We certainly don't need all three articles ("List," "First" and "Early"). I worked a lot on the table for "Early Flight," but I now prefer the simplified table in either "First Flying Machine" or "List of..." (although some of the latter's entries--Whitehead, Wright--are much too long). I would support a single article (eliminating the other two) in the format of "List..." (my preferred title) or "First...", preferably with at least one reference for each entry. Photos/illustrations from "First Flying Machine" could be retained in the merged article. I also prefer that the long, unreferenced narrative of "Early Flight" be eliminated, leaving just a brief introduction and the list. The early literature list could be included or split off into its own article with a link from the main article. DonFB (talk) 03:07, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I think Early flight is the best of all three lists. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 22:59, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Merge per the above comments. I agree with Thryduulf that we should not merge the uncited redlinks. -- Explodicle (T/C) 14:10, 8 July 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.