Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WAPS Promotion Score Calculator


 * 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   merge to Weighted Airman Promotion System. J04n(talk page) 22:59, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

WAPS Promotion Score Calculator

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails verifiability, appears to be non-notable website. Proposed deletion was contested but no indication that sources exist. A search failed to find anything useful specific to this topic, although Weighted Airman Promotion System already has an article there is no relevant content there to redirect to, and probably shouldn't be. Peter&#160;James (talk) 18:28, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Redirect, merging some of the content. It would be appropriate content there, and its own official site is sufficient verification for that, though not for notability. I should have simply done this instead of deleting the prod. DGG (at NYPL) 18:53, 11 February 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by DGG (NYPL) (talk • contribs)
 * I would agree if it was an official site, but this seems to be a self-published unofficial site with no coverage from reliable sources. Peter&#160;James (talk) 20:42, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:03, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:03, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:03, 17 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Redirect it's all information that would just as easily be appropriate for the WAPS page.— -  dain -  talk    03:58, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Merge/redirect as above, as a simple and sensible editorial way of handling the material and search term. --j⚛e deckertalk 22:47, 18 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.