Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Metropolis (airline)


 * 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:12, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Metropolis (airline)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No evidence to support such an airline even exists or existed in the past, article has been without any references for over five years.
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2013 January 30.  Snotbot   t &bull; c &raquo;  08:11, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - Doesn't indicate notability. Shadowjams (talk) 08:24, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 13:50, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 13:51, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 13:51, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 13:52, 30 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete - although the fact that IATA and ICAO codes were assigned demonstrates that it at least existed at some point, existence does not confer notability; nor is an airline intrinsically notable and notability has not been demonstrated for this one. YSSYguy (talk) 08:04, 31 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete: YSSYguy, please note that since this article was created in 2005, there has never been any kind of reference, so there is no source that the airline codes were indeed assigned. Of course, this article is to be deleted -- not even the mere existence of this company can be proven, let alone any significant coverage needed to pass the WP:CORP guideline. --FoxyOrange (talk) 13:54, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Well thank you for your helpful comment; I'm glad we cleared that up, as I seem not to know what I'm on about. I should have added that I went to the trouble of looking for online sources; and that I also looked at the article's revision history and observed that an editor of good standing added the codes, and as I am familiar with his work and know that he wouldn't have added the codes unless he had verified that they had been assigned, its existence had been confirmed as far as I'm concerned. Cheers YSSYguy (talk) 21:41, 2 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment From what little information I can find, Metropolis was a rebranding of Base Airlines. WP:V is satisfied, but without even a single reliable source, even if it's assumed that all scheduled airlines are notable, a keep !vote is impossible. - The Bushranger One ping only 03:34, 2 February 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.