Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Belle Vue Airfield

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 no consensus -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 21:39, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Belle Vue Airfield

Belle Vue Airfield (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

This is an article about a private airfield, which seems to be little more than a long piece of grass, and seems to be one of many similar airfields in existance. I don't know much about private airfields but I would venture that this is not notable. Also, the creator of this article, Haz kk (talk • contribs), also created Atlantic International Airways (AfD discussion), which was deleted as unverifiable (possible hoax). —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-02-26 07:56Z

• Keep Firstly Atlantic Internation Airways is a fictious airline from the film Passenger 57 and referenced in other articles in WP - So that wasn't a hoax article, but a badly defined article (perhaps it should have been a redirect, rather that delete?) I take the view that a real geographical place is worthy of retaining in WP - especially as there is probably a long history related to WW2 for this particular airfield given it's geographical area. The article is referenced, and quite frankly, there's probably a million other articles of similar notability which should be also deleted if this is. My favourite articles for deletion are most of those "famous for 15 minutes" musicians and bands.

Sorry Quarl, I felt like a moan - please don't take it personal. --Richhoncho 11:08, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi Richhoncho, regarding Atlantic International Airways: The thought had crossed my mind that it might be an in-universe fictional airline, but I doubted it because the details didn't seem congruous with something from a film or other fictional work. For example, it has extensive fleet manifest with model numbers and plane counts as well as merger & acquisition history, names of founders, libel lawsuit, alliances with real-world airlines... in fact, the article talks about easyJet, which was founded in 1995, so that article can't be about the 1992 film Passenger 57. —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-02-26 11:43Z

Back to the article at hand, I agree that real geographical places are worthy -- but only to a point. Do we keep articles on all streets? Of course not, we have to draw the line somewhere. As to non-notable bands - I agree non-notable bands should be deleted, and the existance of articles on non-notable bands doesn't mean we should have articles on non-notable airfields. See also Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions#What about article x?. I checked the website listed as a reference before nominating -- it essentially just says that the airfield exists along with 10 or 20 others in that city, which makes me think that worldwide there are countless of these. I searched and didn't find anything notable currently or historically about this airfield, so if you found anything, please say so. —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-02-26 11:43Z

Comment If I had better information about the airfield I would have added it already - far more practical than discussing hypotheticals at the AfD. I would assume because of the location this airfield, and probably most of the other airfields in Devon, was established for the D-Day landings and would have relevant history accordingly. If there was a logical place for a redirect for the article, thats what i would vote for - in the meantime it seems more appropriate to keep. As for the Atlantic airline, I only checked this morning for my own peace of mind before wading in here.--Richhoncho 12:22, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

• Weak delete as the only Google News Archive hits are in relation to the Devon Air Ambulance Trust which bases one of its two helicopters there.[1] I don't think this grants it notability. --Dhartung | Talk 22:41, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
• Weak keep there's a mention on the BBC regarding the airfield's opposition to a proposed landfill site that would attract birds and endanger incoming planes. --Canley 02:33, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, BBC article would do more to enhance the notability of the landfill then the airfield, as it only mentions the airfield in passing. No indication this passes WP:N or that anything beyond a stub could ever be written. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me Please review me!} 18:15, 3 March 2007 (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.