Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Helicopter use in Brasil

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. Woohookitty 08:12, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Helicopter use in Brasil

• Delete This user is also posting articles such as, Cocaine use in Brazil, Anal Sex in Brazil. Paul Klenk 08:06, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, this one is rather interesting. I have no opinion on the other articles. Should be renamed to 'Helicopter Use in Sao Paulo', and I was about to do so, but will leave the existing title until this VfD is finished.-gadfium 08:08, 26 August 2005 (UTC) Changing my vote to Delete. Paul Klenk can put any relevant information he wants into the Sao Paulo article, but there's no need to keep this.-gadfium 04:20, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, Oh Klenk, why the raw feelings about a lifestyle you obviously dont understand i doubt if anyone would care what you say about me as I have always been friendly and willing to learn while a quick check of your comments about me and your past dealings and blocks for personal attacks speak for themselves.Wiki brah 08:14, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, good article. Needs sources. Needs more sources Kappa 10:54, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
• Comment: Unsure. Neither the São Paulo, São Paulo nor the helicopter articles seem to mention this interesting phenomenon at all. We'd be a lot better served if the information were in one of these two places and linked from the other, IMO. The information here is scanty, the article doesn't actually say what the ratio of helicopters to people is, even approximately, it just baldly declares that it's the highest in the world, and offers no figures or references to back this claim, which is therefore unverifiable and arguably therefore unencyclopedic. So the article if accurate may have potential, but as is it would be no great loss if deleted, and it's not obvious to me how to fix it. Andrewa 11:07, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
• Comment, reference doesn't seem to back up the claim the helicopter/inhabitant rate is the highest there. Should be merged in city article and mentioned in Sao Paolo article once it is. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:50, August 26, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep unexpected gem - who would guess Sao Paolo has the highest helicopter per capita? maybe a rename of article as others have suggested as seems specific to Sao Paolo. --KURANDO 13:37, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
• Merge to São Paulo. Would be worth mentioning as trivia in the helicopter article as well. Though I would like to see a citation for the "highest per capita" claim.Roodog2k 14:22, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. The claim that makes this a noteworthy subject is unsourced, and apparently original research/commentary. Monicasdude 16:32, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, but spell Brazil correctly. Trollderella 16:45, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Entirely dependent upon one source; its essentially a summary of the Wash Post article with a couple of other unreferenced claims. Fernando Rizo T/C 16:50, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
• The single source quoted as supporting this article is itself entirely unreferenced and full of anecdotal evidence, in part speculative, and is achingly POV. Just because it's got numbers in it doesn't mean it's true. Delete. Sliggy 18:49, August 26, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Summary of newspaper article. Suggest information appear in Sao Paolo article instead. Sdedeo 19:03, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete The only relevant content is about Sao Paolo, so that's where this peculiarity should be noted. Agree with Sdedeo, Sliggy, Fernando Rizo.

Dottore So 19:20, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. If the single interesting fact can be verified, it should be noted briefly in São Paulo. Dpbsmith (talk) 19:34, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
• Merge and redirect to Sao Paulo. Zoe 20:50, August 26, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Not a useful redirect. The meagre encyclopedic claims this article makes and the source now provided can be copied (the information, not the text) to the São Paulo, São Paulo and/or helicopter articles if someone thinks they are sufficiently impressed to do so. I'm not, it seems a throwaway line in a sensationalised article, and I'd want better sources than that. Andrewa 21:12, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Merges are done so the original author is given credit. If copy-pasted the user's name or IP needs to be included in the edit summary to comply with the GFDL. - Mgm|^(talk) 07:11, August 27, 2005 (UTC)
    • Comment: Exactly. But IMO it's easiest if what is added to the recipient articles is not the text, which is subject to copyright, but just the information, which is not. Merge and redirect is fraught with danger when the redirect is of doubtful value. For example, if the redirect later comes up on RfD, then GFDL impacts will be fully considered, but if it's converted to a stub in good faith and then subsequently renominated on VfD, they may not be. No change of vote. Andrewa 15:39, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Not useful. Groeck 06:34, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. -- Kjkolb 06:56, August 27, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Great band name, bad article. Gamaliel 07:15, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Anal sex in Brasil is a much better band name. Fernando Rizo T/C 07:57, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete- for reasons given above. --Bhadani 15:52, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
• Merge to Sao Paulo as above. ESkog 22:53, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Claim is unverified. -- Alex Nisnevich (talk) 23:30, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
• Comment So, does having anal sex in a helicopter admit you to the "Pile High club?"
  • Comment: Please sign your posts, Dpbsmith. Very funny. No change of vote. Andrewa 17:47, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. *drew 00:41, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. -- DS1953 01:05, August 28, 2005 (UTC)
• Merge to Sao Paolo and Helicopter. This is not unverified, the article has a reference (as of the time of this vote). Martg76 23:47, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment: The Washington Post report now given as a reference does not support the basic claim of the Wikipedia article, that helicopter ownership is the highest in the world. The WP report neither makes this claim, nor provides the number of helicopters, only the number of helipads. So I disagree, the claim is still unverified. No change of vote. Andrewa 20:21, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

NOTE: This has just undergone an extensive rewrite and is no longer an article but a factoid (see its talk page). I stand by my delete comment above and vote to Merge copy and paste the contents to another page, but only if the facts can be verified. Paul Klenk 17:02, 30 August 2005 (UTC) + Do not hang on to the redirect page -- get rid of it. Paul Klenk 01:41, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

• Comment: A good try, but why? The still unverified claim that São Paulo, São Paulo has the highest per capita helicopter ownership in the world can be merged to the other articles without leaving a redirect, so long as you rephrase it into your own words as you have done. There is no merit in keeping this as a redirect, nor its history (nor IMO this claim, based apparently on an inaccurate reading of a sensationalized newspaper report, but that should be discussed in the talk pages of the articles concerned). No change of vote. Andrewa 20:16, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

• Just FYI, the article was written before link was added. Kappa 20:18, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

• Comment: Exactly right, and possibly added partly in response to my first post (unsure, above). However note another has subsequently commented This is not unverified, the article has a reference (also above). The point several of us have made is that this reference does not actually support the claim. No change of vote. Andrewa 21:36, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

• Comment (on the addition to the NOTE above): Merge by copy and paste without leaving a redirect seems to me to risk GFDL problems, and to actually be a vote to delete. See Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Commenting on a listing for deletion. No change of vote. Andrewa 07:39, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Unreferenced; claims not supported by ext link. If the 'highest per capita in the world' claim can be verified, it should be a note in the helicopter article, at most. 68.185.16.5 17:35, 1 September 2005 (UTC) {User:Niteowlneils not logged in, editing from an internet cafe in Roseburg, Oregon.}

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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.