Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wilderness Air


 * 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. No prejudice to recreation if sources are found. Shimeru (talk) 23:25, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Wilderness Air

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Unnotable airline, no references and only its homepage appears on Google Whenaxis (talk) 11:45, 2 April 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:04, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 13:28, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 13:28, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 13:28, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails to indicate notability, and there's no third-party coverage to be found. TheCatalyst31 Reaction•Creation 17:17, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

afdrescue
 * Keep Surely real, boarders on non-notable, but lacks 3rd party coverage. default we should keep and find sources. It's an airline. Outback the koala (talk) 05:49, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Google news search at the top of the AFD finds over a hundred results. Some of them are about this company.  Some are about other things.  There are enough about the company to count as notable coverage.   D r e a m Focus  14:23, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - Those Google News Search that you gave us in the link was about a company in Brunswick, Maine not the one that we are talking about in Ontario. Whenaxis (talk) 22:13, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete despite the claim that it is an airline, it appears to be an air taxi company, providing ad-hoc charters. It does not appear to operate a regular scheduled service. Mjroots (talk) 04:50, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep given its age of nearly 30 years, it is likely there are some sources. Being an airline, also, it is likely there are sources. It is not likely anyone would have heard of it to write about it if not for its sources. Dew Kane (talk) 04:36, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Claiming there are sources is not sufficient. It is for those seeking to retain the article to WP:PROVEIT. Stifle (talk) 08:20, 15 April 2010 (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.