Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ATAv

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. Petros471 17:11, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ATAv

ATTENTION! If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on a forum, please note that this is not a majority vote, but rather a discussion to establish a consensus among Wikipedia editors on whether a page is suitable for this encyclopedia. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines to help us decide this, and deletion decisions are made on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. Nonetheless, you are welcome to participate and express your opinions. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments by suspected single-purpose accounts can be tagged using {{subst:spa|username}}

The whole article appears to be an advertisement for a virtual airline that isn't particularly notable - Canwolf 05:41, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

• Delete — per nom Chris Griswold 07:01, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep It- this site is completly free to anyone so it is not an advertisment. Atavpilot 03:05, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep it- 212.56.128.20 13:25, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - (Nick Comber) the article originally did not at all follow Wikipedia's entry rules. I've cleaned it up to make it a lot more neutral rather than opinionated and advertising, and also emphasised that this is not the real world ATA, including links to the real world ATA. This site operates with full permission from the real world ATA and should be allowed on Wikipedia, article just needs to be from a neutral point of view and not at all opinionated, this is what I have hopefully achieved in my edits. 13:50, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep- it now displays a neutral point of view —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.56.128.20 (talk • contribs)
• Keep It-(Eklapper) not an advertisment, just a legitimate organization's place on Wikipedia. --Eklapper 16:18, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep It-212.56.128.20 17:25, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep It-(IsaacN) Very legit. This article is about a notable, well known group.
• Keep It-(JimW23) No harm, no fowl. Good article, with no code violations. — Possible single purpose account: JimW23 (talk • contribs) has made little or no other contributions outside this topic..
• Keep It- Though there are a few sentences in the article that give the impression the entire article is an advertisement, I see no reason to delete it, merely to edit the offending sentences out. — Possible single purpose account: 70.17.176.190 (talk • contribs) has made little or no other contributions outside this topic.
• Keep- Article about legitimate organization that is notable within its field. --Ibagli (Talk) 23:40, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

• Keep It-(Benoregan) It displays a neutral POV now, so it should be kept --Benoregan 10:13, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

 AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Petros471 16:08, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Can we please have a few more comments from established editors? Petros471 16:08, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

• Delete This seems to be a ame mod, and as such, not-notable. Wildthing61476 16:24, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - non-notable and more importantly there is not a single reference so fails WP:V Yomangani^talk 16:41, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, nonnotable virtual airline. NawlinWiki 16:44, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete fails WP:V WilyD 16:45, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete based on WP:RS and WP:V. --Wafulz 17:08, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

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.