Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Missed approach

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep. —Xezbeth 06:55, May 28, 2005 (UTC)

Missed approach

~~dicdef - already transwikied, no obvious re-direct and I see no real potential --Doc Glasgow 12:13, 21 May 2005 (UTC)~~ point proven keep--Doc Glasgow 13:34, 21 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, google is my friend. Could be further expanded to describe technique, other causes, notable incidents, and how aircraft control manages them. Kappa 13:14, 21 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and expand. Notable aviation term. Capitalistroadster 22:21, 21 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and expand. Valid aviation topic. Megan1967 04:02, 22 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and expand. This is an important and extensive IFR flying topic. However, having said that, maybe it could simply be a section within Instrument flight rules. 63.108.162.253 22:57, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and improve. Lots of accidents happen this way.A2Kafir 19:47, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.