Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of the busiest airports in the former Yugoslav countries


 * 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   no consensus. As regards deletion. But among those who want to keep the article, consensus is that it should be moved to Air transport in Yugoslavia or similar, and limited to the period in which Yugoslavia existed.  Sandstein  10:00, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

List of the busiest airports in the former Yugoslav countries

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Previously nominated but kept without consensus - it was not country-tagged using WP:DS and the article wasn't tagged with modern-day country WikiProjects so it didn't show up on the Article alerts there. This alone should have caused the previous discussion to be relisted... Anyway, this is a WP:SYNTH violation. There's no such relevant geographical/aeronautical grouping such as "Former Yugoslavia" - if there is by any chance, it needs to be documented first. Until then, this is a classic synthesis of published material to promote the biased notion of a Yugosphere. Which is fine when someone does it on their own website, but for an encyclopedic entry this kind of synthesis first has to happen in real life reliable secondary sources. Also, this kind of an advocacy can easily be seen as a violation of WP:ARBMAC. --Joy &#91;shallot&#93; (talk) 09:54, 4 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bosnia and Herzegovina-related deletion discussions. 10:01, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Croatia-related deletion discussions. 10:01, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Kosovo-related deletion discussions. 10:01, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Macedonia-related deletion discussions. 10:01, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Montenegro-related deletion discussions. 10:01, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Serbia-related deletion discussions. 10:01, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Slovenia-related deletion discussions. 10:01, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. 10:04, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. 10:04, 4 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep and Rename. - There are 232 articles with lists of airports in different countries. Yugoslavia and its airports existed and therefore it is certainly notable topic. If the problem is the term "former Yugoslav countries" in the title of this article (and I agree it is) then the article should be renamed, not AfD-ed. Any possible issue with the content of the article can also be resolved without deleting it or WP:ARBMAC threats. Especially because the main contributor to this article chose different, and I think more appropriate, name for this article before it was renamed by editors who supported deletion option. Therefore SYNTH accusations and implying motives to creator of this article ("to promote the biased notion of a Yugosphere") are not justified and could be seen by someone as an Appeal to fear fallacy. They are also inappropriate, especially for editor with sysop rights who did not inform the main contributor to this article about this deletion request. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 10:45, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm not reading into the motives of the contributors - I'm saying what the result is, and also how it can be interpreted. It's contrary to the original research policy, and you now aren't showing an actual effort to fix the original research, instead you are wikilawyering by arguing how I'm a evil and wrong an out to get someone or something. Seriously, that's plain disingenuous. And this is not the first time I've seen you employ a victimization routine in the last couple of weeks. You really need to rethink your behavior here. --Joy &#91;shallot&#93; (talk) 11:05, 4 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete. Lists of airports by countries or within other administrative borders make sense, lists of airports by non-existing countries don't. This is trivia without encyclopedic value because any interpretation of such data must necessarily invoke original research - unless of course the data is from the time before the country's dissolution (which in this case isn't). Once it's complete, Wikidata will be perfect for making such random collections as is in the article now. — Yerpo Eh? 12:32, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Exact time period to which the presented data refer to is not a valid argument for deletion but an improvement opportunity for the article.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 13:36, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * In this case, it's not a simple quantitative improvement issue, but one that requires a totally different set of data, along with totally different interpretation. Keeping the current data until somebody eventually maybe does it (which will require considerably more effort than pulling numbers from internet databases) doesn't make sense. — Yerpo Eh? 11:11, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * You !voted for deletion based on two arguments:
 * this list refers to non-existing country (there are plenty of lists which refer to non-existing countries and they certainly can be very useful)
 * certain data refer to post-Yugoslav period. (The data presented in couple of columns of the main table and few additional tables can be easily erased without much effort and without affecting the quality of the list)
 * I think that none of your arguments are valid arguments for deletion. Am I wrong? --Antidiskriminator (talk) 11:32, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * "Certain" data!? Tell me, what data would remain if you erased the "couple of columns of the main table and few additional tables" that refer to post-Yugoslav period? Please also note that WP:OTHERSTUFF is not a valid argument in this discussion (or any other, for that matter). — Yerpo Eh? 13:03, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * What would remain is the list of airports in Yugoslavia which is actually the subject of this article . My argument was not based on WP:OTHERSTUFF but on opinion grounded in a common sense that lists of xyz of historical countries "certainly can be very useful" . Exclamation mark and harsh tone of your comment were not constructive. I remain unconvinced that "non-existing country" and excess of data are valid arguments for deletion. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 13:37, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * The subject of this article is actually list of airports in Yugoslavia by traffic - you could hardly maintain quality of such a list by removing the complete "by traffic" part of the content, don't you think? However, it would help if you specified what exactly should the list be repurposed and renamed to (which Yugoslavia, to begin with). It's rather unconstructive to make other people guess what you mean. — Yerpo Eh? 13:59, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I already explained that "The main contributor to this article chose different, and I think more appropriate, name for this article before it was renamed by editors who supported deletion option." in one of my previous comments. Couple of hours after the first AfD was closed the name of this article was renamed by an editor who supported its deletion and now the new name is used as an argument for deletion. No, that is not valid argument for deletion, only for renaming.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 14:08, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Those titles are essentially the same, and both reveal that the subject of this list are airports in Yugoslavia by traffic . By simply renaming it back, we'd accomplish nothing, unless somebody dug up historical data, which (as I argued before) is extremely unlikely to happen anytime soon. So again, what do you propose to rename it to? — Yerpo Eh? 16:38, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Incorrect. By renaming this article back the "name issue" will be resolved and it will clearly refer to the former country, not to Yugosphere which is the main (appeal to fear) argument of the editor who proposed this deletion. I think that previous name 'List of the largest airports in the Former Yugoslavia' (before this renaming) was better. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 15:56, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, but you missed the main issue completely (clearly stated as WP:SYNTH in the deletion proposal). Instead you got stuck with the proposer's personal opinion which isn't exactly relevant for this discussion. And no, the main issue wouldn't be solved at all by juggling with semantics of the title. — Yerpo Eh? 16:35, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * WP:JUSTAPOLICY is an argument to be avoided in the deletion discussions. The same refers to the Subject no longer exists argument of yours. Taking in consideration that one of the arguments for deletion was based on the lack of the references I think it is really hard to apply WP:SYNTH argument here. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 16:47, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I explained my concerns regarding WP:SYNTH at least twice, so implying that I use WP:JUSTAPOLICY is slightly dishonest, you know? As is misinterpreting/ignoring them again. What exactly do you intend to achieve by that? — Yerpo Eh? 16:56, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * And I explained that the data presented in couple of columns of the main table and few additional tables can be easily erased without much effort and without affecting the quality of the list. Therefore it would be absurd to apply WP:SYNTH here just because of the excess of the data which don't even refer to former Yugoslavia and should be removed from the article. Your comment is again unnecessarily harsh and contains unjustified accusation and violation of wp:agf and wp:civility. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 18:07, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but I cannot assume good faith if you don't demonstrate it and it's not uncivil to point out the fallacies in your arguments and ask you what's the purpose of stubbornly sticking to them and constantly trying to derail the discussion. So please stop wikilawyering and I'll try to explain for the last time:
 * I explained that the data presented in couple of columns of the main table and few additional tables can be easily erased without much effort and without affecting the quality of the list
 * False. Then it wouldn't be a "List of the busiest airports in the former Yugoslav countries", nor would it be a "List of the largest airports in the Former Yugoslavia" anymore. Just a "List of airports in former Yugoslavia" - the only remotely sensible title for this collection after deleting wp:synth'd data, but it would still have to specify which former Yugoslavia it refers to (I assume Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia). Is it understandable now? — Yerpo Eh? 18:59, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Your comment is again unnecessarily harsh. Nothing I wrote gave you right to violate AGF in my case. You used fallacy in your discussion not me. It is notability fallacy explained here: Existence. It is incorrect that the subject of this article has to be result of synth. There are of course many reliable sources which cover the topic of this article. Yugoslavia collected and published data about trafic on its airports trough statistical publications. In case of this article SYNTH can not be valid argument for its deletion. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:57, 6 January 2013 (UTC)


 * You apparently do not understand the concept of WP:SYNTH. Please read the fine manual. --Joy &#91;shallot&#93; (talk) 08:21, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * You are apparently joining discussions on multiple pages or topics I edit or multiple debates where I contribute, in order to repeatedly confront or inhibit my work.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 08:34, 7 January 2013 (UTC)


 * *facepalm* I literally haven't even taken a look at the history of this article before nominating it for deletion. It doesn't matter who wrote it, it's still an unambiguous violation of the improper synthesis policy. --Joy &#91;shallot&#93; (talk) 10:00, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * And now that I have taken a look, I'm even more confused at your accusation because you haven't edited the article before this AfD, instead seems to have written most of it. Are you saying that's actually your account, or? --Joy &#91;shallot&#93; (talk) 10:05, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I am sorry for my mistake. I forgot that it was you who nominated this article for deletion. I appologize.
 * I think this issue is very simple but I will try to explain my position about the SYNTH violation for the last time. The synth violation exists only in the data which refers to post-Yu periods and which should be removed from the article. It would be wrong to delete this article because of this part which will be removed anyway. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 13:30, 7 January 2013 (UTC)


 * The problem is that most of the article is indeed such data. The background part can be easily upmerged into some other article. --Joy &#91;shallot&#93; (talk) 13:56, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree. Antidiskriminator managed to ignore the crucial part of my argument again (therefore reaffirming my opinion about his lack of good faith), so I won't bother explaining again. I'll just say that keeping this list under the current or previous title would be misleading and therefore dishonest to the reader. It's as if we made an article about Hermann Einstein with the content describing his son's life, then deleted everything but the death date and kept the husk with the rationale that someone may someday write something about mr. Hermann as well. That, I believe, would be utter nonsense. This list can still be recreated later when somebody actually does contribute the relevant data. — Yerpo Eh? 13:45, 8 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete The previous AFD cited the Nordic and Baltic lists. I don't see Yugoslavia as being a defining characteristic such as those two are. I mean, it's like having a list of airports in the Commonwealth of Nations. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 15:09, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:11, 5 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete. Keep, but delete the tables and post-1991 data. I wouldn't have any problems with the article if: 1) it listed Yugoslav airports with contemporary (i.e. pre-1991) data only, or 2) it could be shown that there are reliable sources with listings, comparisons, or analyses of airports in the former Yugoslav republics which are grouped together and referred to as such. Otherwise, the list criteria seem arbitrary and artificial. There is legitimate content here though, which is best moved to e.g. Air transport in Yugoslavia. GregorB (talk) 01:40, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, the article's section "The Former Yugoslavia" describes the history, presumably correctly, but it's also entirely unreferenced, so we don't really know. It could be moved to an unreferenced stub article. --Joy &#91;shallot&#93; (talk) 10:39, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Lack of references is not valid reason for deletion. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 15:15, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * And nobody's insisting on deleting possibly valid content, but it has to be disconnected from improper synthesis. --Joy &#91;shallot&#93; (talk) 08:21, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Agree. It seems my position is compatible with the underlined comment by Antidiskriminator above. So, on second thought, forking and deletion would not be the best option then. (Article history?) So: do we have a consensus that removal of identified WP:SYNTH content + rename would do the trick? If we do, then let's do it and withdraw this nomination. GregorB (talk) 13:54, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm changing my position accordingly. GregorB (talk) 21:30, 8 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete per GregorB's comments - criteria for inclusion of modern data in the list come off as arbitrary.--Tomobe03 (talk) 11:02, 6 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep, but delete lists with modern data and rename article to Aviation in Yugoslavia. It is relevant to a part of history. --Smihael (talk) 15:02, 8 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm not opposed to gutting the article, but it has to be done carefully, per WP:EDITATAFD. And, which exact new title is best? --Joy &#91;shallot&#93; (talk) 21:17, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I guess it's either Aviation in Yugoslavia (per Smihael) or Air transport in Yugoslavia (suggested by yours truly). Both have precedents. The second one is more narrow, but fits the content. GregorB (talk) 21:26, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, we should keep this article somehow, but not under this name... Air transport in Yugoslavia looks ok for me too. -- WhiteWriterspeaks 19:11, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Seven days has passed, and we appear to have consensus for a gutted version moved to Air transport in Yugoslavia. Someone please do it (the rules expressly forbid me to do it as I am the original nominator). --Joy &#91;shallot&#93; (talk) 13:36, 11 January 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.