Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blida Airport

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. John254 19:04, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Blida Airport

Blida Airport (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

So far as I know, there is no notability guideline for airports. However, this article is so short I don;t know whether it is notable, there are no sources which allow me to do so, and the article is so short as to be worthless, in fact it's so short it is technically not even good enough to be a stub. I suggest we delete it until someone writes a better and more comprehensive article. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 12:35, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

• Keep. Airport serves a city of nearly 900,000 inhabitants, so there must be something to it even if it's in a third-world country. Rather than burn the stub, let's leave it alone and see what it grows into. - RPIRED 13:08, 11 July 2007 (UTC)#

It has been a single sentence for seven months. I think the encyclopedia would be better served if it were deleted and we waited for someone to start a more extensive article, as this one is seriously not helpful. Why not write a bit yourself if you think it should be kept? Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 13:35, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I do not deign to have expertise or knowledge in the area of aviation, which is why I refrain from expanding it myself. However, I believe that one sentence is at the very least somewhat better than nothing at all in this case, since it does contain at least some information that I assume aviation enthusiasts or people looking for information on the airport would be interested in even in the limited nature of the article. What little is there isn't poorly conceived, and it's definitely not out of the question that someone might come along and improve this. There are better stubs to be getting rid of. - RPIRED 13:39, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't see why they can't all be deleted. Though my point here, of course, that that by the definition of WP:STUB, "an article containing only a few sentences of text which is too short to provide encyclopedic coverage of a subject, but not so short as to provide no useful information.", this article fails to meet even that. No point having a sentence hanging around for another seven months while we optimistically twiddle our thumbs. It has just occurred to me I have not alerted the creator - I will do so now. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 13:44, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

• Keep per RPIRED or merge/redirect to the city's article until significant expansion is done like to add info about history, features, services, flight destinations, etc, etc.JForget 23:17, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
• Keep - I think that coded airports are notable, and can be also expanded with runway(s) length, orientation, as well as the servicing airlines, etc that are mentioned above. Since the sources may mainly be in a non-English document, the lack thereof should not be a deletion reason. I also disagree with the idea that there is some unwritten time-limit for stubs to be improved. Especially when it comes to articles whose existence helps us to counteract WP:BIAS. Neier 04:26, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
• Keep I've just added it to the Algerian WikiProject to see if people are interested to expand it. Blida has a total poulation of 880,000. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 13:17, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
• Addendum The airport was very active during the French military campaigns in Algeria. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 13:20, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
• Keep per RPIRED and FayssalF. Airport serving city of over 90,000 and of historical military significance. If the same airport was in the United States, I doubt this would be an issue. --Oakshade 15:40, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Please keep your racist insinuations to yourself. I would nominate any article on anything from anywhere that was one sentence long. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 17:24, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

• Keep per points made by other keepers. Golfcam 18:09, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
• Comment Expanded and think it is enough to warrant a "Keep". -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 21:43, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
• Keep after expansion. It's still kind of a stub, but since it has an IATA code, that makes it notable in my book. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 23:14, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
• Strong keep. An IATA/ICAO code is all you need to have a notable airport, and this airport has more to it than just a code. Blida is a very important city (although it's a mystery to me why there are no interwiki links to the article in Arabic! -->( بليدة (مدينة ). I know it's off topic, but can any bot correct this please???--Targeman 03:02, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
• Keep as expanded. Honestly, I cannot imagine any situation where an IATA/ICAO coded airport would not be notable enough, so long as reliable sources existed. (jarbarf) 03:38, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. The WWII incident alone I think makes it notable enough. --Android Mouse 22:32, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
• Keep Airports are significant public infrastructure. Therefore, they are notable for being what they are. This is especially true if they do have an ICAO designation.--Kylohk 02:57, 15 July 2007 (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.