Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wireless Broadband via Commercial Aircraft (BCA)


 * 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. Mr.Z-man 17:30, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Wireless Broadband via Commercial Aircraft (BCA)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

The creator of this article removed a prod tag by adding information that does not address the concerns of the prod. While one reference gives a patent number, and the other one gives a potential coverage area, neither reference do establish any actual notability for this invention, either through actual usage or any other independent coverage. Delete.  Blanchardb - Me•MyEars•MyMouth - timed 22:04, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete I did not find anything which would indicate any possible notability in google, searching either for the person or the product. But it is a common name, do my search there was not complete. DGG (talk) 22:37, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete This was, in general, a means to go the Last mile for widely spread out cities. I'm not sure that this particular solution is notable, but other prospects have had some coverage.  A company named Angel Technologies Corporation pushed a project called HALO with an aircraft called Proteusin the late 1990's.  It's apparently defunct, but the idea was popular before the widespread acceptance of DSL/Cable.  This looks to be a product (or notion) that uses extant aircraft and provides broadband over prior flight paths--which would be unrelated to the technology in general.  Looks like Scaled Composites Proteus is the "Proteus" I mentioned before.  Searching for this particular product while excluding searches for HALO (and like programs) resulted in very little.  I can't imagine that we can build an article on this subject yet. Protonk (talk) 00:52, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep I'm the article writer/starter after I found this website Tele-Avionics and couldn't find any other information about this when I searched for it on the net. I think it should have some gereral informationvalue once it is completedDcpwr (talk) 23:44, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - with only one non-independent reference, this is an article whose time has not come. Rklawton (talk) 03:42, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep I'm a bit confuesd. I address all the remarks and added more refs and content. Yet the article was deleted this morning. I think the information is relavent and will develop as a source for information. Please keep the articleDcpwr (talk) 00:08, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry, you only get to vote once. Assuming the article is deleted, then just wait for the concept to "develop" and then try again.  It's against policy to create articles of stuff that might one day be notable.  It's not against policy to recreate an article if the situtation significantly changes.  Rklawton (talk) 01:16, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
 * So just becuase it does not exsits in GoogleTM we shouldn't read about this?Dcpwr (talk) 01:35, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
 * We also accept references from reliable books, magazines, and journals. Without any of that, you're out of luck.  Rklawton (talk) 01:58, 6 November 2008 (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.