Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aviator Sports and Recreation

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 of the debate was no consensus. --Ezeu 06:13, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Aviator Sports and Recreation

This is created by a new user and seems advert-like, POV, and NN, although it doesn't seem to fit into any of the WP:CSD. {{advert}} tag was removed. --ais523 15:12, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

• Posted by the article's creator This article was not intended as an advert. Please advise as to what is making it appear that way so that it can be revised. --69.38.167.162 16:59, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
  • The article seems to contain language (e.g. 'state-of-the-art') that is more common in a company brochure than in an encyclopaedia article. It is also structured in an unusual manner. Most of all, though, it seems to consist of statements that the company might make, as opposed to statements that other people might make discussing or describing the company. Relevant policies and guidelines are WP:SPAM, WP:NN, and WP:NPOV. --ais523 17:08, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

The information on aviator sports which is a renewal project of a national historic site is quite informative and useful. It does however contain some information that appears to be promotional which should be corrected.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.237.188.55 (talk • contribs).

Comment User has no other edits. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 08:12, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Public projects are of interesst to the community—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hturko (talk • contribs).

• Delete, fails WP:SPAM, WP:NN, and WP:NPOV. --Coredesat talk 21:50, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

• This project is of public interest and pass WP:NN; it has been listed in Cranes New York Business periodicle the week of 2/27/06, The Sports Business Daily on 5/3/06, on NY1 Broadcast News, and in the New York Daily Online publication.--rdt 15:53, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
• This project is not WP:SPAM as there are no external references made anywhere else on Wikipedia other than on this article that refer to corporate websites dealing with this project.--rdt 15:53, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
• While not a member, but frequent user of wikipedia, I find the aviator sports article to be very enlightening. As a new Yorker I find public projects to be of interest and I found this article to be very informative not only about its self but also with regards to the information that it gives on Floyd Bennet Field and the National Parks service. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.107.168.146 (talk • contribs).
  • User has no other edits. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 08:11, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
• As the original author of this article, I welcome other people to research this interesting public/private project and contribute to this article. I feel that it is a very important public relationship and resource that people should be aware of and I will make whatever edits that other contributors to this site deem necessary to keep this article up in this unbiased informative domain.--rdt 14:21, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

• Comments about this being Spam are erroneous! Similar articles appear throughout Wikipedia about private rather than public projects e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madison_square_garden and others. Aviator Sports is a National Park Service / private industry joint venture that is of great interest to both the local community and the nation. The article is informative and clearly belongs in an encyclopedia such as Wikipedia. If there are specific issues that make it appear commercial the reader should exercise the editor’s pen rather than flag it for deletion, time better spent by all. Encourage good contributions and help new contributors rather then put up a wall against contributions. --Henry 15:44, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

• Keep & change tag to Cleanup. It is an article about a sports venue. The principle of articles on sports venues is well established. As is the principle of articles on events or buildings not yet complete. The objection is to the style of the writing. The tag therefore should be Cleanup rather than Delete. SilkTork 13:54, 5 July 2006 (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.