Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of large aircraft (2nd nomination)


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Possible Merge or Rename can be discussed on the article talk page. Liz Read! Talk! 23:22, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

List of large aircraft
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

This list has no encyclopedic value. "Large aircraft" are defined by aviation authorities such as the FAA and ICAO, and basically include all the airliners, transports, flying boats, bombers and oddballs of any significant size. The class of large aircraft is huge and this list will grow endlessly over time. But it has no cohesion other than a bureaucratic designation. These types are better listed (if at all) within the various more familiar classes I just mentioned, such as the List of airliners by maximum takeoff weight.

There is already an article on large aircraft, covering their characteristics, history and so forth. It includes a historical list of the largest built, so there is no mileage in repurposing this list article along such lines.

The previous AfD in 2014 got tangled up while these and other issues were being figured out, and failed to reach a consensus. Now that things have settled down for a few years, it is time we revisited the matter. &mdash; Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 16:48, 25 August 2023 (UTC)


 * The Aircraft Wikiproject has been notified of this discussion.
 * The Aviation Wikiproject has been notified of this discussion.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:18, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete - potentially far too large and WP:INDISCRIMINATE a list to have any encyclopedic value. - Ahunt (talk) 17:16, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Size of a list is not a valid reason to delete it. List of aircraft list dozens of lists of aircraft divided in alphabetical order.  And it is not indiscriminate since it only list aircraft that US Federal Aviation Administration classifies as large, and which are notable enough to have their own Wikipedia articles.   D r e a m Focus  18:02, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Aviation and Lists.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:19, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep. Meets WP:NLIST per "Further reading" section in the article. Has very clear inclusion criteria (FAA and EASA definitions) of three types. In the current list, every item is bluelinked to an article about the entry, so even within the relatively clear and strict inclusion criteria, this list is far from indiscriminate. This informational list allows readers to compare length, span, maximum takeoff weight, and other characteristics, so meets WP:LISTPURP. I'd be willing to help split out the "Lighter than air" section as it sort of confounds this list, but it may be able to be included with some work. I think an editorial decision to merge the section and this list would be reasonable, but it is not necessary as an AfD outcome, at the moment they are built differently and such a merge will require a deeper familiarity with the pages in question. &mdash;siro&chi;o 17:45, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep I participated in the last AFD back in 2014‎. This article has far more things listed than the other article does, and more columns showing additional facts as well.  There are hundreds of lists of aircrafts in Category:Lists of aircraft and its subcategories.  This list has useful information, not just a list of names, so is more useful than most of those, and only list aircraft of a certain type.   D r e a m Focus  18:02, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep Clearly meets NLIST per above, a valid topic for a list. I don't have any problem with a merge request, but this shouldn't be deleted. SportingFlyer  T · C  18:14, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge with large aircraft, there is already a fair amount of overlapping. Jan olieslagers (talk) 18:20, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge to large aircraft per above. Neither article is particularly large. Referencing is needed (and bolding explained - most probably record holders) for the fixed-wing table, however. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:16, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment: OP here. I'd be happy to see a merge back in to the main article. The current "list of large aircraft" still only includes types which were largest in some way; neither its title nor its inclusion criteria reflect that, and those two things are what really need to be abandoned. But for the merge to happen, it needs to be recognised that the list of Largest built is going to dominate the criteria of what gets included and what gets dropped, and that will mean dropping role-specific stuff such as the heaviest military hang-glider, or whatever. &mdash; Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 17:28, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep - but change title to List of larg est aircraft, (just like List of longest ships). - w o lf  09:32, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep - Definitely Encyclopedic value and whilst the list contents (correctly) overlap other existing lists, this article/list provides unique value for those searching for this information. I don't see the value in a merging with other (admittedly very related) articles, but perhaps a discussion on a examining if there is a better name for the list.  (For my opinion, I agree with @Thewolfchild above, and then it would benefit from intro paragraph describing many different ways to quantify "largest" (the longest ships list is only about 1 aspect of ships: length), not sure what the most ideal word is here though (Record-breaking? Of exceptional size? Notable? (<- last one is not very encyclopedic) ) DigitalExpat (talk) 06:18, 6 September 2023 (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.