Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/McGee Air Services


 * 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 delete. With respect to the merge request, an undeletion+redirection can be asked for at WP:REFUND (I see that none of the delete arguments opposed such an option) providing that a redirect target is provided. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:17, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

McGee Air Services

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This company does not appear to have received sufficient independent coverage to satisfy WP:NCOMP. Refs 1 & 3 are press releases; ref 2 is a more substantial article but I don't think it sufficies on its own. Searches throw up a number of further PR items but nothing better. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 21:18, 24 May 2019 (UTC) Elmidae (talk · contribs) 21:18, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:26, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:27, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Ceethekreator (talk) 21:28, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. Ceethekreator (talk) 21:28, 24 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom, in hindsight not sure why I didn't nominate it myself instead of placing the notability tag. signed,Rosguill talk 21:49, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Merge to Alaska Airlines or Alaska Air Group – Ever since becoming a good article, activity on the Alaska Airlines article has been heavy on the sort of short-shelf-life, directory-like information favored by WP Aviation and short on additions focusing on the airline's history or the overall picture. If this is a subsidiary, it's entirely appropriate to mention it for a paragraph or so in the context of the parent's history. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions  02:02, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I hadn't viewed the Alaska Air Group article in some time before casting this !vote. Looks like mention of this entity takes up half of that article's lead section while it isn't mentioned at all in the article body.  This once again proves that we're not out to create lead sections in articles, but rather we're out to separate a block of text from the rest of the article for purely stylistic purposes and pawn if off as a lead section. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions  02:09, 26 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete as a not particularly notable subsidary. MilborneOne (talk) 16:55, 29 May 2019 (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.