Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Strawberry Field (airport)

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 speedy keep. The FAA is indisputably a RS and no OR has been identified. If the notability of the article remains under question following expansion, it can then be renominated. (non-admin closure) Alakzi (talk) 16:23, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Strawberry Field (airport)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not Notable. No Reliable sources. Original research. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 06:16, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - although the article relies on a single source, that source (Federal Aviation Administration) is definitely reliable. sovereign°sentinel (contribs) 11:01, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP - wow, seriously you jumped on the article on barely three hours after I created it in the middle of the night?!?!?!? Keep, there's the FAA source (can anyone say reliable source independent of the subject???) also a few more I didn't have the chance to add in yet because the article WAS JUST EFFING CREATED. This article will comply for inclusion based on WP:GNG and WP:NGEO when given more than a few hours in the middle of the night to grow, but thanks anyway for trying to club a baby seal. JackTheVicar (talk) 12:12, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep calm down, JackTheVicar. The one source is definitely reliable, and there are probably more RS to be found. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs)}~ 14:10, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:27, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:27, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, and trout the OP for a premature nomination. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:35, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep No Reliable sources? Original research? Did the nominator read the article and look elsewhere for sources as required by WP:BEFORE? There's more than enough here and available online to support notability. Alansohn (talk) 15:43, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.