Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FlightGlobal
Appearance
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- FlightGlobal (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails to meet WP:GNG criteria for Organisation/Corporation. No notability, references are primary sourced and major WP:COI in that FlightGlobal Marketing is a major contributor of this article LukeWWF (talk) 11:00, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 11:08, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 11:08, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 11:09, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
- Keep. I don't see how article creator User:MilborneOne has a COI here (nor other editors involved in the article). This is an increasingly popular information for aerospace (see NGRAM with the rise from their 2006 foundation). There are used significantly by others as can be seen in google scholar, filtered google news (-flightglobal.com), and google books). This is one of these situations in which finding sources is made difficult by the sheer amount of sources that are citing and quoting FlightGlobal.--Eostrix (🦉 hoot hoot🦉) 11:44, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
- Keep - the article creator is a Wikipedia admin and editor with decades of good standing and not in a COI as falsely claimed above. An apology is clearly warranted for that accusation. The article has third party refs and meets WP:GNG. As noted in the article, the subject of the article won a major award, so clearly notable in aviation and journalist circles. - Ahunt (talk) 12:06, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
- Comment: Let's remain on topic of AfD and not the author. Being an Administrator does not nullify AfD requests from users: This is not Wikipedia policy. You will see User:MilborneOne has a lot of good contributions, but also a few deleted articles under similar procedure. LukeWWF (talk) 21:44, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
- Keep Created by a Wikipedia admin who has done years of useful contributions. It Passes GNG with reliable coverage available. NagalimNE (talk) 16:40, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
- Comment: @LukeWWF: I see you have amended your COI claim above to now indicate
major WP:COI in that FlightGlobal Marketing is a major contributor of this article
. I would like to point out that this is also false. While User:FlightGlobal Marketing made two spammy COI edits to the article when it was first started, they were immediately reverted and their current net contributions to the article are exactly nil. You can note they were also blocked from editing in 2016 due toPromotional username, promotional edits
. - Ahunt (talk) 19:59, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
- Comment: @LukeWWF: I see you have amended your COI claim above to now indicate
- Comment: Correct, I updated my comment for clarity. If you conduct a LinkedIn search for staff at FlightGlobal and reference users editing this article you will see a major COI over time. MilborneOne may be the creator but he is not the COI I am referring to. I was hoping those replying to this AfD would do some due dilligence on ALL contributors. Thank you. LukeWWF (talk) 21:44, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
- Comment: Please read the current actual article text - it is neutral and factual, there is no COI text there now, unlike for one day in 2016 as I noted above. There is no valid COI argument to be made for deleting this. - Ahunt (talk) 22:37, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
- Keep: as originator of what is an article on a major and respected online aviation website to complement printed works from the same organisation it clearly passes notability guidleines. The COI issue has been delt with by others above. Not really relevant but of the 16 deleted articles (out of 1730 I have created in 15 years) none relate to similar organisations or websites so a bit misleading and hardly relevant. MilborneOne (talk) 17:47, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
- Keep – Major name in the aerospace media sector and owner of the established Flight International magazine. Merging FlightGlobal into Flight International wouldn't make much sense either, in case anyone was going to propose that. --Deeday-UK (talk) 10:19, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
- Keep agree with all keep voters above. Webmaster862 (talk) 08:31, 13 September 2021 (UTC)