Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Taquan Air: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
reply
m Fix Linter errors.
 
(35 intermediate revisions by 12 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
<div class="boilerplate metadata afd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.''
<!--Template:Afd top

Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links in order to create a new discussion page using the name format of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGENAME (2nd nomination)]]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->

The result was '''keep'''. Listed for 21 days with only one editor supporting the nomination. Looks like another "white whale" for Beeblebrox :( [[User:Ron Ritzman|Ron Ritzman]] ([[User talk:Ron Ritzman|talk]]) 01:47, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
===[[Taquan Air]]===
===[[Taquan Air]]===
{{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|P}}


:{{la|Taquan Air}} – (<includeonly>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Taquan Air|View AfD]]</includeonly><noinclude>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2011 February 22#{{anchorencode:Taquan Air}}|View log]]</noinclude>)
:{{la|Taquan Air}} – (<includeonly>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Taquan Air|View AfD]]</includeonly><noinclude>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2011 March 1#{{anchorencode:Taquan Air}}|View log]]</noinclude>)
:({{Find sources|Taquan Air}})
:({{Find sources|Taquan Air}})
Another local airline in Alaska. All sources used in the article are the subject's own website. Nothing any better found in a search. This airline operates 8 small planes in [[Southeast Alaska]], which has lots and lots of little local airlines like this because there are few roads in the area. Fails [[WP:CORP|notability guideline for businesses]] as there do not seem to be any independent [[WP:RS|reliable sources]] that discuss the subject. [[User:Beeblebrox|Beeblebrox]] ([[User talk:Beeblebrox|talk]]) 23:19, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Another local airline in Alaska. All sources used in the article are the subject's own website. Nothing any better found in a search. This airline operates 8 small planes in [[Southeast Alaska]], which has lots and lots of little local airlines like this because there are few roads in the area. Fails [[WP:CORP|notability guideline for businesses]] as there do not seem to be any independent [[WP:RS|reliable sources]] that discuss the subject. [[User:Beeblebrox|Beeblebrox]] ([[User talk:Beeblebrox|talk]]) 23:19, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

*<small class="delsort-notice">'''Note''': This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Alaska|list of Alaska-related deletion discussions]]. <!--Template:Deletion sorting--></small><small>—[[User:Beeblebrox|Beeblebrox]] ([[User talk:Beeblebrox|talk]]) 23:21, 15 February 2011 (UTC)</small>
*<small class="delsort-notice">'''Note''': This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Alaska|list of Alaska-related deletion discussions]]. <!--Template:Deletion sorting--></small><small>—[[User:Beeblebrox|Beeblebrox]] ([[User talk:Beeblebrox|talk]]) 23:21, 15 February 2011 (UTC)</small>
*<small class="delsort-notice">'''Note''': This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Transportation|list of Transportation-related deletion discussions]]. <!--Template:Deletion sorting--></small><small>—[[User:Beeblebrox|Beeblebrox]] ([[User talk:Beeblebrox|talk]]) 23:23, 15 February 2011 (UTC)</small>
*<small class="delsort-notice">'''Note''': This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Transportation|list of Transportation-related deletion discussions]]. <!--Template:Deletion sorting--></small><small>—[[User:Beeblebrox|Beeblebrox]] ([[User talk:Beeblebrox|talk]]) 23:23, 15 February 2011 (UTC)</small>
Line 10: Line 17:
*<small class="delsort-notice">'''Note''': This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Business|list of Business-related deletion discussions]]. <!--Template:Deletion sorting--></small> <small>-- [[User:Gene93k|• Gene93k]] ([[User talk:Gene93k|talk]]) 16:04, 17 February 2011 (UTC)</small>
*<small class="delsort-notice">'''Note''': This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Business|list of Business-related deletion discussions]]. <!--Template:Deletion sorting--></small> <small>-- [[User:Gene93k|• Gene93k]] ([[User talk:Gene93k|talk]]) 16:04, 17 February 2011 (UTC)</small>
<hr style="width:55%;" />
<hr style="width:55%;" />
:<span style="color:#FF4F00;">'''[[WP:RELIST|Relisted]] to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.'''</span><br /><small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, [[User:Ron Ritzman|Ron Ritzman]] ([[User talk:Ron Ritzman|talk]]) 00:00, 22 February 2011 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:Relist -->[[Category:Relisted AfD debates|{{SUBPAGENAME}}]]
:<span style="color:#FF4F00;">'''[[WP:RELIST|Relisted]] to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.'''</span><br /><small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, [[User:Ron Ritzman|Ron Ritzman]] ([[User talk:Ron Ritzman|talk]]) 00:00, 22 February 2011 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:Relist -->
*<s>'''Keep'''. You can book seats on this airline on Expedia. The air accident also shows that Taquan Air has been in the news. More work needs to be done to the article but I think it is a keeper.</s> <small>[[User:Nipsonanomhmata|<span style="color:white;background:#007">&nbsp;<span style="background:#00c">Nipson</span><span style="background:#00e">anomhmata</span>&nbsp;</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Nipsonanomhmata|(Talk)]]</sup></small> 01:06, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
*<s>'''Keep'''. You can book seats on this airline on Expedia. The air accident also shows that Taquan Air has been in the news. More work needs to be done to the article but I think it is a keeper.</s> <small>[[User:Nipsonanomhmata|<span style="color:white;background:#007">&nbsp;<span style="background:#00c">Nipson</span><span style="background:#00e">anomhmata</span>&nbsp;</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Nipsonanomhmata|(Talk)]]</sup></small> 01:06, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
**'''Comment''' - The fact that you can book tickets does not establish notability. -- [[User:Whpq|Whpq]] ([[User talk:Whpq|talk]]) 10:34, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
**'''Comment''' - The fact that you can book tickets does not establish notability. -- [[User:Whpq|Whpq]] ([[User talk:Whpq|talk]]) 10:34, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Line 33: Line 40:
:::::::The point is that it is not necessary to change policy to consider at AfD that public passenger airlines are in the sociological group called [[institution|institutions]], are part of the [[public sector]] regulated by the [[FAA|US government]], and that each public passenger airline has status nationally.&nbsp; Just how and how much this influences other criteria, I'm not prepared to say, nor given the continuing stream of new sources I've found (Taquan was on the cover of Anchorage-based Alaska Business Review magazine in 1997) do I expect that there is a need to do so, but I think that this consideration should be on the table, and that this consideration should be available to related AfD discussions.&nbsp; [[User:Unscintillating|Unscintillating]] ([[User talk:Unscintillating|talk]]) 06:23, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
:::::::The point is that it is not necessary to change policy to consider at AfD that public passenger airlines are in the sociological group called [[institution|institutions]], are part of the [[public sector]] regulated by the [[FAA|US government]], and that each public passenger airline has status nationally.&nbsp; Just how and how much this influences other criteria, I'm not prepared to say, nor given the continuing stream of new sources I've found (Taquan was on the cover of Anchorage-based Alaska Business Review magazine in 1997) do I expect that there is a need to do so, but I think that this consideration should be on the table, and that this consideration should be available to related AfD discussions.&nbsp; [[User:Unscintillating|Unscintillating]] ([[User talk:Unscintillating|talk]]) 06:23, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
::::::::There is no inherent notability for airlines. Period. Full stop. [[WP:NRVE|Notability requires verifiable evidence]] and not just assertions that being an airline means they should be notable. If you've found such sources, please bring them forward for consideration. I'm always open to changing my mind, but this is the last I will say on this matter on notability guidelines as it seems we are going around in circles. -- [[User:Whpq|Whpq]] ([[User talk:Whpq|talk]]) 18:14, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
::::::::There is no inherent notability for airlines. Period. Full stop. [[WP:NRVE|Notability requires verifiable evidence]] and not just assertions that being an airline means they should be notable. If you've found such sources, please bring them forward for consideration. I'm always open to changing my mind, but this is the last I will say on this matter on notability guidelines as it seems we are going around in circles. -- [[User:Whpq|Whpq]] ([[User talk:Whpq|talk]]) 18:14, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' references look fine to me. --[[User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )|Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )]] ([[User talk:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )|talk]]) 03:46, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' references look fine to me. While a crash doesn't make an airline notable the attention the airline gets from reliable sources because of the crash, does. --[[User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )|Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )]] ([[User talk:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )|talk]]) 03:46, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
*Just in general response to the whole notability discussion and which guideline to use: at many discussions of this nature in the past users were making up arbitrary criteria out of thin air, based on number of planes, government contracts, etc. There were calls for the relevant wikiprojects to establish a sub guideline. A series of conversations were held on the subject and the result was [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Airlines/Notability|this guideline]], which as you can see establishes that there is no "magic bullet" for airline notability. The idea that it is "public transportation" and therefore notable is illogical, all of these little airlines are open to the general public. Ketchikan also has water taxis, land taxis, an airport ferry, and city bus service.[http://www.visit-ketchikan.com/GettingHere/GettingAroundKetchikan.aspx] This airline is but one small part of the transportation infrastructure in the area. [[User:Beeblebrox|Beeblebrox]] ([[User talk:Beeblebrox|talk]]) 18:28, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
:*The nominator supports the nomination with the statement that this carrier has "8 small planes", and here he states "...arbitrary criteria out of thin air, based on number of planes".&nbsp; I didn't need to go to a Wikiproject discussion to suspect that the criteria that might be suitable for this AfD would be more specific than what might be suitable for a policy discussion. This is because this is an AfD discussion specific to the US, and policy/guideline discussions at this stage in Wikipedia's life must be more general than how to apply criteria such as the 125 carriers in the US that are "certificated".&nbsp; Even if some participants in an AfD choose not to agree that it is relevant to the discussion, having standing as a "public sector institution" is a form of being noticed, and applies under the fundamental guideline, "worthy of notice".&nbsp; We now know that this particular carrier was at one time one of the largest in the state, the largest floatplane operator in the world, achieved FAR part 121 certification, and according to Google, 80 books have taken notice of the topic.&nbsp; Local, state, and federal governments all take notice.&nbsp; At the federal government we have the president, the senator from Alaska, NTSB, FAA, DOT, Forest Service, NOAA, and agencies I've not even heard of doleta, fbo, and bts to name three, and there is also the US Mail which is now <del>private</del> <ins>independent</ins>.&nbsp; State of Alaska has files concerning pollution cleanup at the old Ketchikan Air site, court cases, and Gravina Bridge access studies (the bridge to nowhere), local government ketchikan.ak.us for example lists [http://www.city.ketchikan.ak.us/community_links/transportation.html this]. Taquan has been on the cover of the Alaska Business Monthly (Anchorage), covered by the Alaska Journal of Commerce, covered by non-local newspapers at Thorne Bay and Sitka, nationwide coverage for the 2007 accident such as foxnews, usatoday, and msnbc. The accident was important enough that it is now part of aviation history. I don't agree that US citizens don't have editorial control over the NTSB, I think that we choose that they take notice of airplane accidents, and they don't have a guaranteed job.&nbsp; This was a matter of importance to the safety of cruise ship tourists and economics involving 1,000,000 passengers per year to Ketchikan.&nbsp; Even if my vote as a citizen didn't count, there is a strong bias in our government that because decision makers take public air transportation, they prefer safe public transport airplanes, and take notice of public air transports.&nbsp; I'm not personally aware that water taxis get federal attention; however, [[Gravina Island Bridge|the attempt to obsolete that airport ferry]] has been a matter of considerable nationwide political debate.&nbsp; [[User:Unscintillating|Unscintillating]] ([[User talk:Unscintillating|talk]]) 02:50, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
:I'm not sure what to make of the bulk of that remark. From what I can gather you are asserting that tight government oversight of airlines confers notability onto those airlines. I don't believe that is the case. If a bus crashes through a guardrail and plummets into a river, the NTSB will likely file a report on that incident as well, that doesn't mean that the owners of the bus are automatically notable. I'm not sure what you mean about the president, there is nothing about any presidents in the article. Senator Stevens was involved in anice photo-op where he presented an award to this airline that was also presented to six other airlines that fulfilled the criteria of that program. You are mistaken to say that the U.S. Mail is a private enterprise, it was, is, and continues to be one of the [[Independent agencies of the United States government]]. I'm also not sure what your point is about the bridge to nowhere, which is a separate issue that achieved a much higher level of national attention. And you seem to have completely misunderstood my point about the airline notability guideline. [[User:Beeblebrox|Beeblebrox]] ([[User talk:Beeblebrox|talk]]) 04:23, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
::The "bulk of that remark" reports "significant coverage" in "reliable" "sources" "independent of the subject" = [[WP:GNG]].&nbsp; [[User:Unscintillating|Unscintillating]] ([[User talk:Unscintillating|talk]]) 19:50, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
:::#Regarding "confers notability", no, I'm not asserting that "notability was 'conferred'", the words don't even make sense.
:::#whpq already referenced a book in which the owner of Taquan went to Washington to meet the president.&nbsp; To the extent that it is relevant, WP:CORP states, "Notability requires only that these necessary sources exist, not that the sources have already been named in the article."
:::#I'm saying the same thing about the Gravina access studies as I said about the pollution analysis, these are some of the many documents in which the state of Alaska takes note of Taquan Air.&nbsp; [[User:Unscintillating|Unscintillating]] ([[User talk:Unscintillating|talk]]) 19:50, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
::::Sigh. I'm sorry that this seems to be getting caught up in semantics. Government oversight of the airline industry is obviously a notable topic. That does not mean that every enterprise that is subject to that oversight is automatically notable. That's what I meant by saying "government oversight of airlines confers notability onto those airlines." Since I gave a comparative example I'm not sure what was so nonsensical about that, but I think I've clarified it sufficiently now. Likewise, the President of the United States is obviously a notable person, but literally thousands of people meet the president each year. One person involved with an a organization meeting the president does not confer notability on that organization either. If the president made a speech that was largely about Taquan Air or some major national level policy decision was clearly influenced by this one crash of a small airplane that would be different. That the state of Alaska noted that Taquan Air was one of the airlines that would be impacted by the Gravina Island bridge also does not confer notability. Every other airline, cargo service, pilot, and passenger to fly in or out of Ketchikan would be affected as well. I can see that you are endeavoring on good faith to improve the article, which is great, but a lot of what you are saying here is not sound. [[User:Beeblebrox|Beeblebrox]] ([[User talk:Beeblebrox|talk]]) 21:13, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
:::::We seem to be dealing with some basic concept or concepts of notability beyond "worthy of notice" and "significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject".&nbsp; But repeating the phrase "confers notability" and giving examples of something that from my viewpoint only exists as your idea of what I'm thinking, and projecting that concept onto me even after I have told you that it does not represent my viewpoint does not move the conversation forward (sorry).&nbsp;

:::::[http://www.alaskacoast.state.ak.us/District/FinalPlans/Ketchikan/05-01-06/CZM%20Plan%20Volume%20II/Vol%202-5%20TransportUtil%20Feb%206.doc Here] is a simple example of a non-trivial statement.&nbsp; The publisher is [http://www.alaskacoast.state.ak.us/ Division of Coastal and Ocean Management (State of Alaska, Juneau)], reporting about the Ketchikan Gateway Borough, Ketchikan Coastal Management Plan.&nbsp; It states, "Peninsula Point Seaplane Base.&nbsp; The State-owned Peninsula Point Seaplane Base has been abandoned for nearly ten years and is not currently maintained for aircraft use.&nbsp; This facility has a concrete ramp and one hangar.&nbsp; Rocks and debris at the entrance to this facility impede floatplane operations.&nbsp; Taquan Air leases space at Peninsula Point for aircraft storage."

:::::So here we have an example of the State of Alaska noticing Taquan. This is a reliable independent source providing significant coverage about Taquan Air's use of the hangar at Peninsula Point Seaplane Base. Also note that the name Taquan Air is so well known in the context of floatplanes in Ketchikan that the agency doesn't need to give any more identification than the name.&nbsp; [[User:Unscintillating|Unscintillating]] ([[User talk:Unscintillating|talk]]) 00:18, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
:::::::You call ''that'' a significant non-trivial mention? One sentence in a planning document? That is an absolutely terrible example and the very definition of a passing mention with no depth of coverage. I am honestly flabbergasted that you would put that forward as an example of your idea of "providing significant coverage." I don't know what else to say except that your idea of what constitutes significant coverage is badly out of step with Wikipedia norms if that is what you choose as a representative example of such. [[User:Beeblebrox|Beeblebrox]] ([[User talk:Beeblebrox|talk]]) 01:58, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
::::::::I expect that you are aware that the civility of your response goes against those very norms that you claim to be representing.&nbsp; The word "insane" in the edit comment was not, I felt, a good choice to represent the norms, either.&nbsp; Please don't misquote me like you did twice, I said "significant coverage about Taquan Air's use of the hangar at Peninsula Point Seaplane Base."&nbsp; I'm not claiming to be an expert, but something that I see here is that you are having difficulty in fitting this example into notability policy.&nbsp; [[User:Unscintillating|Unscintillating]] ([[User talk:Unscintillating|talk]]) 02:18, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
:::::::::I don't see where I have misquoted you in that remark. In fact I copy/pasted the only quote from you in that remark directly from your previous remark. I don't think you have to be any kind of a Wikipedia policy expert to see that for what it is, a brief passing mention that does not actually discuss Taquan Air itself at all. We don't need anything beyond [[WP:GNG]] on this point, certainly: ''""Significant coverage" means that sources address the subject directly in detail, so no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention but it need not be the main topic of the source material."'' So, yeah, I'm having trouble seeing how this example satisfies that policy, because it is excruciatingly obvious that it does not. [[User:Beeblebrox|Beeblebrox]] ([[User talk:Beeblebrox|talk]]) 02:54, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
::::::::::::I also note that the article now repeatedly cites this: [http://www.peninsulaclarion.com/stories/051100/ala_051100ala0pm050001.shtml]. I would not consider the website of the ''[[Peninsula Clarion]]'' to meet WPs definition of a reliable source. The ''Clarion'' is a free weekly paper that is basically a bunch of advertisements with a few brief, poorly researched stories thrown in to make it look like a real newspaper. I realize that is not something that would be immediately obvious from a web search, but I think if we took it to [[WP:RSN]] for review the answer would be that it falls far short of what we expect from a source. [[User:Beeblebrox|Beeblebrox]] ([[User talk:Beeblebrox|talk]]) 03:03, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
:::::::::::::I see no documentation to support the assertion that this newspaper's articles are "poorly researched".&nbsp; The article about Taquan Air has an [[Associated Press]] byline, who as far as I know have a good reputation.&nbsp; The idea that a free weekly newspaper in Kenai has a reporter 750 miles away in Ketchikan doesn't make sense.&nbsp; As for the newspaper itself, the page identifies that it is a division of [[Morris Communications]] in Georgia.&nbsp; According to [http://www.peninsulaclarion.com/about.shtml this webpage] the paper moved on from the weekly edition in 1978.&nbsp; As to whether or not the paper is free, [http://www.peninsulaclarion.com/circulation/ this page] shows a subscription price of $9 per month.&nbsp; [[User:Unscintillating|Unscintillating]] ([[User talk:Unscintillating|talk]]) 05:36, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
{{outdent}}
Well something's not right then. It is available for free once a week at locations around the town where I live, and it is mostly comprised of advertisements and stories of local interest only. I don't get it. [[User:Beeblebrox|Beeblebrox]] ([[User talk:Beeblebrox|talk]]) 06:48, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
:Ok, I went and got a copy to try and clear this up, it seems the free edition I see around town is something called the "Clarion Dispatch" and is not the main "real" newspaper. from Kenai. Therefore disregard my remarks about the ''Clarion''. [[User:Beeblebrox|Beeblebrox]] ([[User talk:Beeblebrox|talk]]) 17:39, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
::I have corrected the article to show that the paper in based in Kenai, rather than Ketchikan, which is 750 miles away from Ketchikan, and added that [[Associated Press|AP]] is the author.&nbsp; Please analyze the relationship of this article/reference/source to (1) [[WP:N]] "worthy of notice", (2) [[WP:GNG]], and (3) [[WP:CORP]].&nbsp; Thanks, [[User:Unscintillating|Unscintillating]] ([[User talk:Unscintillating|talk]]) 19:00, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
*'''Comment'''. Well, if the entity is notable, there would be an article about in the Anchorage Daily News. And there isn't. There are some articles the ''mention'' the entity, but if I read [[WP:CORP]] right we are looking for ''coverage'', something like at least a short feature on the entity itself. And if the Anchorage Daily News doesn't care about the entity, why should we? On the other hand... gee, it's a nice enough article. Someone went to to the trouble to dig up ''27'' refs and do all that writing, and you hate to just toss that away, and [[WP:CORP]] is just a guideline, and its not like the article is spam or anything like that. I know, we're not supposed to pay mind to article quality, but you kind of can't help that sometimes. I don't really know what to "vote", it seems on the bubble, but given all the discussion above then a '''no consensus to delete''' close would seem reasonable to me. [[User:Herostratus|Herostratus]] ([[User talk:Herostratus|talk]]) 19:21, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
::<small>[Insert begins here]</small>
::I think you are reading too much into [[WP:CORP]].&nbsp; WP:CORP states,<blockquote>Notable means "worthy of being noted" or "attracting notice." Wikipedia bases its decision about whether an organization is notable enough to justify a separate article on the verifiable evidence that the organization or product has attracted the notice of reliable sources unrelated to the organization or product."...A company...is notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in secondary sources.</blockquote>As per WP:GNG, "Significant coverage" cannot be based on "trivial" coverage.&nbsp; WP:CORP helps with examples of trivial mentions:
<blockquote>
::* sources that simply report meeting times, shopping hours or event schedules,
::* the publications of telephone numbers, addresses, and directions in business directories,
::* the season schedule or final score from sporting events,
::* routine communiqués announcing such matters as the hiring or departure of personnel,
::* brief announcements of mergers or sales of part of the business,
::* simple statements that a product line is being changed,
::* routine notices of facility openings or closings (e.g., closure for a holiday or the end of the regular season),
::* quotations from an organization's personnel as story sources, or
::* passing mention, such as identifying a quoted person as working for an organization.
</blockquote>

::"Significant coverage" cannot be based on "trivial" coverage, but anything beyond trivial (such as IMO the disputed AlaskaCoast document above) can contribute toward "significant".&nbsp; I also suggest looking at [[WP:GNG]] for this AfD, as this is an alternate criteria for deciding that a topic is notable.&nbsp; See also, [[Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions]].&nbsp; [[User:Unscintillating|Unscintillating]] ([[User talk:Unscintillating|talk]]) 00:55, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
::<small>[Insert ends here]</small>
:I agree this is a bit thornier than some of the other Alaska bush airline AFDs we've had recently. That an AP stringer in Southeast wrote an article that was reprinted on the Kenai Peninsula is better I guess just a local paper, but the Clarion is ''another'' local paper. I do not agree that the sheer number of refs are particularly impressive as many of them are actually Taquan's own website and several more are rather mundane government documents. [[User:Beeblebrox|Beeblebrox]] ([[User talk:Beeblebrox|talk]]) 19:38, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
:::At Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airlines/Notability, did you state, "it is not acceptable to make up criteria out of thin air just to "win" at AFD. <small>Beeblebrox (talk) 01:40, 23 July 2010 (UTC)</small>"?&nbsp; It appears to me that "rather mundane government documents" takes the form of "making up criteria".&nbsp; Is it not true that government documents fit under existing policy and don't need made up criteria?&nbsp; Thanks, [[User:Unscintillating|Unscintillating]] ([[User talk:Unscintillating|talk]]) 23:15, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

::'''Coverage in ''[[Juneau Empire]]''''', and comment regarding Anchorage newspapers.
::Anchorage is 750 miles from Ketchikan and in a different time zone.
::Seattle is closer than Anchorage and is two time zones away in the other direction.

::Berlin and London are by comparison 580 miles apart.

::Juneau is 205 miles from Ketchikan, and the ''Juneau Empire'' provides coverage. I tried searching for AirOne which only lasted for a year, and found 16 hits (AirOne provided a nonstop connection between Juneau and Ketchikan).&nbsp; Searching for "Taquan Air" yields five pages of hits starting in November 1997, [http://search.juneauempire.com/fast-elements.php?querystring=AirOne&offset=0&hits=10&hc=y&type=standard&profile=juneau&addListings=false&tags=AirOne here] and [http://search.juneauempire.com/fast-elements.php?type=standard&profile=juneau&querystring=%22Taquan+Air%22 here]. I think that these references from ''Juneau Empire'' alone satisfy (1)&nbsp;WP:N "worthy of notice" and (2)&nbsp;[[WP:GNG]], and for good measure (3)&nbsp;[[WP:CORP]] is also satisfied.&nbsp; [[User:Unscintillating|Unscintillating]] ([[User talk:Unscintillating|talk]]) 22:45, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
<hr style="width:55%;" />
:<span style="color:#FF4F00;">'''[[WP:RELIST|Relisted]] to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.'''</span><br /><small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, [[User:The Bushranger|The Bushranger]] <sub>[[User talk:The Bushranger|<span style="color:maroon;">One ping only</span>]]</sub> 01:04, 1 March 2011 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:Relist -->
*'''Keep'''. Reinstate my keep vote as a result of all the good work made by editors after my initial comment. <small>[[User:Nipsonanomhmata|<span style="color:white;background:#007">&nbsp;<span style="background:#00c">Nipson</span><span style="background:#00e">anomhmata</span>&nbsp;</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Nipsonanomhmata|(Talk)]]</sup></small> 13:23, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
*'''Comment'''&nbsp; [http://www.juneauempire.com/stories/091408/obi_332203439.shtml Here] is an example of a "trivial mention" for Taquan Air.&nbsp; It fits with the example "passing mention, such as identifying a quoted person as working for an organization."&nbsp; [[User:Unscintillating|Unscintillating]] ([[User talk:Unscintillating|talk]]) 14:07, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' This page has lots of good infomation in it. [[User:Wilbysuffolk|Wilbysuffolk]] ([[User talk:Wilbysuffolk|talk]]) 17:41, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' - There does seem to be enough coverage from multiple sources to pass [[WP:GNG]]. --[[User:Oakshade|Oakshade]] ([[User talk:Oakshade|talk]]) 23:52, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
*'''Comment'''&nbsp; [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation/Notability]] states, "This page is an essay on notability. It contains the advice and/or opinions of one or more WikiProjects...This advice is not a formal Wikipedia policy or guideline, though it may be consulted for assistance during an AfD discussion...In particular, the following types of topics will almost always have sufficient coverage to qualify:..."All airline companies."&nbsp; FYI, [[User:Unscintillating|Unscintillating]] ([[User talk:Unscintillating|talk]]) 02:48, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
*'''Comment'''&nbsp; I have listed on the Discussion Page forty-six (46) refs from the article excluding those from taquanair.com.&nbsp; The text itself of these 46 refs is 22,000 bytes, in an article of less than 40,000 bytes.&nbsp; I also note that no one has disputed that the references from just the one newspaper ''Juneau Empire'' satisfy both WP:GNG and WP:CORP, either of which would establish notability.&nbsp; FYI, [[User:Unscintillating|Unscintillating]] ([[User talk:Unscintillating|talk]]) 02:48, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. We can cover all cases of commercial air transport without it hurting too much. The length of references indicates that someone really wants it. --[[User:SmokeyJoe|SmokeyJoe]] ([[User talk:SmokeyJoe|talk]]) 14:09, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
:Indeed, I am concerned that the ref-bombing is causing [[WP:PUFF]], but that's neither here nor there in this conversation. [[User:Beeblebrox|Beeblebrox]] ([[User talk:Beeblebrox|talk]]) 22:24, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>

Latest revision as of 19:40, 19 July 2023