Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International Engine Component Overhaul
- 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 keep. Most people argue that the content should be merged somewhere, so feel free to do it. - Bobet 00:21, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- International Engine Component Overhaul (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
The company is not notable on it's own, and given the nature of the company business it would not generate much notable news upon which the article can be expanded. 0 results in google news Russavia 04:28, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep This user has nominated at least five Singapore Airlines-related articles in what appears to be personal crusade against "SIA Fanboyism [1]". Stubs, being stubs, have room to grow, and are not non-notable for being under developed. You found 0 results in Google news, but google search itself produces 423[2]. Please do no establish notability using your own barometres.--Huaiwei 07:30, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment And I have nominated one Northwest category and one Cathay Pacific category, and I am sure there will be many more to come. And the reason I have nominated these SIA articles is because they should not be in wikipedia, as they are not notable entities, are not encyclopaedic, and they have no room to grow, hence why they are still stubs after some 2 years. So argue to keep on the merits of whether they do belong on wikipedia or not, not on some Singapore Airlines fetish which you seem to have, in which anything and everything to do with SIA needs its own article.
- This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 12:11, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete These articles compose a directory of Singapore Airlines subsidiaries, and nothing more. At best they can be listed in the the airline's article. Mangoe 16:39, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. In what way is an article on a subsidiary a "directory"? If it needs to be repeated once again, these subsidiaries were actually listed in the said article but were moved to secondary pages to trim the overbloated main article. Your suggestion reverses earlier initiatives, and is not exactly a feasible idea.--Huaiwei 23:05, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment If the overbloated article is not suitable, then surely it could be said that a page which will never grow pass stub stage would not be suitable either. Perhaps it would be better to create a new article such as Singapore Airlines subsidiaries and present the information in that article, whilst still keeping individual articles on the truly notable subsidiaries such as SilkAir. The articles which could be merged into the subsidiary article would be:
- Comment. In what way is an article on a subsidiary a "directory"? If it needs to be repeated once again, these subsidiaries were actually listed in the said article but were moved to secondary pages to trim the overbloated main article. Your suggestion reverses earlier initiatives, and is not exactly a feasible idea.--Huaiwei 23:05, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- International Engine Component Overhaul
- SATS Security Services
- SIA Engineering Company
- Singapore Aero Engine Services Private Limited
- Singapore Aircraft Leasing Enterprise
- Singapore Airport Terminal Services
- Singapore Flying College
- Tradewinds Tours and Travel
It would clean up the Singapore Airlines category that is for sure, and make such deletion noms less likely. --Russavia 20:04, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel Bryant 09:54, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete or alternatively merge with Singapore Airlines, or create [{Singapore Airlines subsidiaries as above. But this article should not exist. --Dhartung | Talk 10:22, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge this, and the other seven articles listed by Russavia, into Singapore Airlines subsidiaries. Keep standalone articles only where multiple independent non-trivial coverage is actually found, per WP:ATT. Barno 19:12, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge into a subsidiaries article. Second choice: delete. Clearly not enough material here for an article and no sources provided. --kingboyk 21:53, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Limited keep for SIA Engineering Company and Singapore Airport Terminal Services. Both of these are listed on the Singapore stock exchange and may have notability on their own. However, those articles would need to have some reliable sources added. If they are merged, they should be allowed to be recreated when sources are added. Vegaswikian 19:28, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete This should not be exist. Non notable per nom G1ggy Talk - Chalk 02:41, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge into Singapore Airlines subsidiaries, as that article is now existant, and seems a worthy place for the content. Also, isn't this AfD about due to be closed, one way or another? Charlie 09:52, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge per Russavia, for 3 of the 7. Keep SIA & SATS per Vegaswikian. Also keep Singapore Aircraft Leasing Enterprise — not owned by Singapore Airlines. MrZaiustalk 10:06, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Also keep Singapore Flying College, for table et al. Seems closer to being fleshed out than the rest. MrZaiustalk 10:08, 19 May 2007 (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.