Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lund Airport


 * 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. Liz Read! Talk! 23:47, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Lund Airport

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

WP:NBUILD. ICAO and Swedish AIS charts for the airport no longer exist, zero mentions from news articles of the airport in either English or Swedish, only sources of information for the airport are self-published sources (see, for example, this swedish blog or this flight simulator site). Fermiboson (talk) 19:02, 21 November 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:13, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Aviation and Sweden. Shellwood (talk) 19:36, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment. There is actually quite a few articles about the airport when looking at Swedish news. A Mediearkivet search for "Hasslanda flygfält" or "Hasslanda flygplats" turns up a long row of articles, typically around 500 words, focused on Hasslanda Airport, even though coverage is limited to more recent articles. I'd imagine a search at tidningar.kb.se, the newspaper archives at the Royal Library of Sweden, would turn up (or hint at: it's difficult to access) more, but they seem to be having technical difficulties right now. I'll check back later. /Julle (talk) 16:06, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. Admittedly not a clear-cut keep with fantastic refs, but the article is no longer unsourced; someone with proper access to the newspaper archives of the Swedish Royal Library should hopefully be able to add more. /Julle (talk) 01:33, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Weak keep Not the best article on the encyclopedia but seeing it has a good number of references (for a stub), it should not be deleted.
 * Signed, Pichemist ( Contribs 15:45, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep - now meets WP:GNG. Hopefully will be expanded over time. - Ahunt (talk) 16:10, 29 November 2022 (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.