Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Proposed Airtran Takeover of Midwest Airlines


 * 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. It can't be transwiki'd to WikiNews, which does not accept transwikis, but an article could potentially be created there. Neil  ム  10:20, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Proposed Airtran Takeover of Midwest Airlines

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This is not WikiNews and there is little need for a separate article on a proposed (and seemingly failed) business transaction. A summary in both the Midwest Airlines and Airtran articles is sufficient. (Also, other editors have POV issues with the article). Zim Zala Bim talk  17:55, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete if this is a failed business deal, it hasn't made enough impact that an article is merited. Not to mention rampant POV throughout. Rackabello 01:59, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOT - This is more appropriate for WikiNews, although a transwiki is not possible.  Corpx 04:43, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep This is a pretty big deal here in Milwaukee, and is a pretty big deal for the company... Needs some work, but I say keep Nick Catalano contrib talk 10:03, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep This is a textbook example of a hostile corporate takeover, and an exercise in corporate governance. This acquistion is also being used as a case study at multiple financial instutions.  I do not agree that it has POV issues, but if that's the case, that's not an argument for deletion, just discussion and editing.  In addition, this is (to date) not a failed business deal.  However, if this acquistion were to fall through, it still has academic merit as listed above. Finally, if the information is valid enough to be in two separate sections (Airtan and Midwest pages) it only makes sense to combine them in one article.   Veritasnow 08:31, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
 * "This is a textbook example..." - then perhaps it belongs at Wikibooks. :) -- Zim Zala Bim talk  13:47, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Touche' -- Veritasnow


 * Delete or merge into Midwest Air Group or AirTran Holdings which already also cover parts of this. No need to split this out into its own article.  Even larger mergers are covered in the history for one of the companies.  The other option is to just move it to wikinews.  If kept or merged, the article needs cleanup and better cites. We don't need to repeat information in three articles!  Vegaswikian 02:31, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - If this merger fails, I would prefer to keep this article off the main articles (although it somehow manages to be keep exceeding its nine lives). There is no question Midwest is going to be taken over by some bigger company.  The question is who and the strategy for each plan is interesting.  The takeover attempts for what it's worth is colorful since the airline is very distinctive thanks to its cookie and unusual wide seats.  I would prefer that this debate be kept separate from articles for the airline or airlines into which it might be merged.  Americasroof 03:04, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * There are thousands of "interesting" takeover attempts involving "distinctive" companies occurring daily. Should each get an article? -- Zim Zala Bim talk  03:54, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Rename to TPG Acquisition of Midwest Airlines - If TPG finally closes the deal this article should be renamed and focus on the TPG acquisition. Airtran put Midwest into "play" and TPG took advantage.  This article includes a level of detail you do not normally see on Wikipedia (Wikipedia by in large sucks on business articles).  How an Airtran takeover offer was transforrmed into a TPG takeover is notable.  Americasroof 14:25, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, this article does provide a level of detail not normally found in WIkipedia, becuase wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a news reporting service. -- Zim Zala Bim talk  14:47, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. Merge some basic facts into each airline's page. A blow-by-blow report is not particularly useful now that the deal seems to be done and, for now, AirTran has lost its bid. Meeples ( talk )( email ) 07:42, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Newsworthy does not equal worthy of an article. This is better kept in the companies articles. - Nabla 18:10, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Transwiki to WikiNews but certainly maintain reference to the ongoing event in the involved corporate articles and provide a link to WikiNews as one of (or the main) reference for the event (I'm not sure if WikiNews is considered a reliable source or not). --User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 23:50, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Cant transwiki to wikinews due to license conflicts Corpx 02:27, 20 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete as per nom and Nabla. Harlowraman 03:01, 20 August 2007 (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.