Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/QualityWings


 * 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 and salt. &mdash;Darkwind (talk) 07:09, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

QualityWings

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Long story short, I came across this as a speedy for WP:G11. I noticed that it was a pretty rough version of an article by a newer user, so I moved it to their userspace with a note about reliable sourcing. The page was moved back almost instantly by the editor, so I'm bringing it here for a proper AfD. I was going to speedy it as A7, but the assertion that it is "a leader in add-on development for Microsoft Flight Simulator" makes it maybe squeak by a speedy deletion. The prose here is kind of buzzy, but I don't think that the editor was deliberately trying to create a promotional page. The problem here is that there just isn't coverage out there that would assert that this company is ultimately notable enough to merit an article or even a true mention on the MFS page. I can find some press releases and various links that can't be used as reliable sources to show notability, but not much else. I thought that it might be fairer to take this to a proper AfD than to speedy it as promotion for the above reasons, as well as to give others a chance to try to find sources. I feel a little bad as this is the user's first article, but it just doesn't pass notability guidelines and I tried to give them another option. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   10:45, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment: The original editor has mentioned on the talk page that they would potentially keep re-adding this to the mainspace. I would recommend a salting of this article after it is deleted. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   16:21, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 11:37, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 11:37, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

So you will delete this page, but refuse to delete another even though I found this "Precision Manuals Development Group (abbr. PMDG) is a commercial add-on aircraft developer for the Microsoft Flight Simulator series. The company is often noted as one of the leaders in the add-on and development community of Microsoft Flight Simulator, regarding highly detailed simulated aircraft that closely resemble their real world counterparts.[1]" So this crap. If it gets deleted, I'm just going to keep posting, because frankly, this is a much more interesting page then say, wikipedia or wikileaks. --Bookbloxer (talk) 12:50, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:22, 14 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete. I don't see coverage in reliable sources, and the way WP works, posts on forums aren't enough to identify something as "leading" or significant. Bookbloxer, I hope your "I'm just going to keep posting" is not a statement of intent to edit disruptively. –Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 22:06, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Well in this case, i'll be nominating the PMDG page of a deletion, because that is excatly the same. --Bookbloxer (talk) 01:13, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Comment To suit both partys, what about a merge with the PMDG page to make a "Flight Simulation Add-On Developers" page? ideas Bookbloxer (talk) 03:22, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
 * The problem is that you would still have to show notability to some extent for both developers. If you want to create a page for the concept of add-on developers that specialize in flight simulation, you would have to show that this specific niche of AOD have received coverage in reliable sources. We sometimes contain lists within articles of these types, but in most cases the list is comprised of companies/people/things that pass notability guidelines and already have an article. The reason behind that is because otherwise it tends to become an always incomplete list of companies/subjects that is prone to spam and is a nightmare to oversee and verify. If you want to nominate the other page, feel free. The existence of other articles doesn't really mean much, as all that usually means is that an article hasn't been nominated for deletion yet. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   16:12, 15 September 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.