Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of very light jet operators

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 delete. Wifione _.......^{Leave a message} 14:22, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of very light jet operators

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

At the time this list was created, it may have been useful, but with an explosion of very light jet types )and the industry frantically trying to disassociate itself from the term following the Eclipse Aviation fiasco), this has the potential to become a ridiculously large list. Do individuals count as 'VLJ operators'? And isn't this pretty much the same thing as List of airliner operators would be? A list of, say, air taxi companies would be useful, as would lists of commercial operators by type (although that last might have notability issues). This, however, is an indiscriminate list. The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 23:59, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Indiscriminate and non-encyclopedic list as per WP:INDISCRIMINATE. - Ahunt (talk) 00:39, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:23, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:23, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete doesnt appear to add any value to the encyclopedia. MilborneOne (talk) 21:47, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete; list is unmaintainable unless there is another source out there which maintains a database and doesn't mind us copy & pasting it (which I doubt). Already, if we're lucky, news of fleet changes/orders would be reflected in the operator's article and maybe the vendor/type article. I'm not optimistic that anybody wishing to update wikipedia to match some source would go find a third page too. Would a category be better? bobrayner (talk) 15:19, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Wackywace ^{converse | contribs} 18:30, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:INDISCRIMINATE Admrboltz (talk) 03:05, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:INDISCRIMINATE --Kudpung (talk) 13:05, 30 October 2010 (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.