Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NeshAir
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. - Mailer Diablo 04:39, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] NeshAir & Neshair
This article was created by User:FrummerThanThou on 28 November, 2006, to tout a yet-to-be created and dubious "Haredi" airline in Israel. (At the same time an anonymous user added information to the Lev Leviev article that Leviev is founding NeshAir [1] which User:Frummer affirmed adding Leviev's interests in "aviation" [2] and the only mention of "Leviev and NeshAir" on Google is a link to the Leviev article on Wikipedia [3]) So we go full circle and Wikipedia thus becomes the ONLY source for all this baloney as Wikipedians and the world are "taken for a (sky) ride" on "NeshAir"! All this is highly suspicious and violates a number of things. A simple Google search shows exactly three hits for a "NeshAir" airline [4], the first being its own one web page ad for itself [5], and the other two are links to Wikipedia: this article, and its mention in the El Al article, also inserted by User:FrummerThanThou [6] into which he added: "...This resulted in the leading Haredi rabbis such as Rabbi Kanievsky, Eliashiv and Aron Leib Steinman to proclaim a boycott on the airline and promoting the new Haredi Neshair airline. jpost.com" HOWEVER a careful reading of the jpost.com article reveals ABSOLUTELY NO MENTION of "Neshair" - so what we have here is Wikipedia helping to promote a lie about something that does not exist. This goes against Wikipedia:Notability (companies and corporations) (Wikipedia articles are not advertisements); Wikipedia:Hoaxes; WP:NOT#CBALL; WP:NOT#WEBSPACE; Wikipedia:Verifiability and probably other rules as well. In addition, User:FrummerThanThou should be blocked from further edits for his multiple ongoing disregard of Wikipedia editing policies and guidelines (see Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 December 14#Template:Bruchim and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Orthodox Halakha.) IZAK 13:17, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- Notice the above reads as a condemnation of myself, my contributions to wikipedia on the whole and is mostly nothing to do with why the article should be deleted. frummer 16:07, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- Have you read it at all Frummer? It's about how you have tried to create PR for a company that does not exist and unfortunately it fits into a pattern of how you operate, and all I have done is state the places where you have caused much trouble. Unfortunately, based on all these cases, I have concluded that you are a menace to Wikipedia, based in your actions and activities. Sad but true. IZAK 16:25, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- Delete for above reasons. IZAK 13:17, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. MER-C 13:21, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- Keep The first hit looks legit to me. Also, this is not the page to discuss whether frummer should be blocked. Take it to an admin; not here. MetsFan76 13:34, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- MetsFan: No need to get so hot under the collar. He is a self-acknowledged sockpuppet, see User talk:IZAK#Close Shave and User talk:El C#More disruptions. It's relevant here, because this is part of a series of his deliberate disruptions of Wikipedia. So does anyone who puts up exactly one incomplete "under construction" web page with no information on it, have the right to have a Wikipedia article based on it? You make no sense. Did you notice that he lied when adding: "...and promoting the new Haredi Neshair airline..." in the El Al article (which is a serious article) when no such thing happened? Kindly do not vote on a kneejerk basis merely for the sake of disagreeing with me because this is not about me. Rather, analyze the contents of the discussion before us please. Thank you. IZAK 13:50, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- IZAK....I'm not being "hot under the collar." I just think you are in the wrong forum to discuss frummer's actions, of which I am aware of. And thank you, but I will vote how I please. MetsFan76 13:54, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- Hi MetsFan: Of course anyone can vote how they please, but sometimes it helps to get another view. Glad to know all's well though. IZAK 13:58, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- All is well. MetsFan76 14:02, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- Actually IZAK....all is not well. I just reread what you wrote to me. "I make no sense??" Is your email turned on b/c I think we need to have a talk... MetsFan76 15:30, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- Hi Mets: Does it make sense to say that "The first hit looks legit to me" -- when Frummer has not stated the truth -- and then vote to "keep" this article (based on that flimsy one hit)? Why is that so complicated? IZAK 16:06, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- IZAK: I am not going by what frummer has said. I did a google search and saw the website. And I think you need to tone it down. MetsFan76 16:41, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- Hi Mets: Does it make sense to say that "The first hit looks legit to me" -- when Frummer has not stated the truth -- and then vote to "keep" this article (based on that flimsy one hit)? Why is that so complicated? IZAK 16:06, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- Actually IZAK....all is not well. I just reread what you wrote to me. "I make no sense??" Is your email turned on b/c I think we need to have a talk... MetsFan76 15:30, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- All is well. MetsFan76 14:02, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- Hi MetsFan: Of course anyone can vote how they please, but sometimes it helps to get another view. Glad to know all's well though. IZAK 13:58, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- IZAK....I'm not being "hot under the collar." I just think you are in the wrong forum to discuss frummer's actions, of which I am aware of. And thank you, but I will vote how I please. MetsFan76 13:54, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- MetsFan: No need to get so hot under the collar. He is a self-acknowledged sockpuppet, see User talk:IZAK#Close Shave and User talk:El C#More disruptions. It's relevant here, because this is part of a series of his deliberate disruptions of Wikipedia. So does anyone who puts up exactly one incomplete "under construction" web page with no information on it, have the right to have a Wikipedia article based on it? You make no sense. Did you notice that he lied when adding: "...and promoting the new Haredi Neshair airline..." in the El Al article (which is a serious article) when no such thing happened? Kindly do not vote on a kneejerk basis merely for the sake of disagreeing with me because this is not about me. Rather, analyze the contents of the discussion before us please. Thank you. IZAK 13:50, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- Delete as per above. Yossiea 14:17, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- Delete As per notability guidelines. --Zegoma beach 14:58, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- Delete, no assertion of notability. Terence Ong 15:05, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- Comment, nom is corrent there are no sources besides for company's own email statement. At present with the lack of sources, the article may qualify for deletion. frummer 16:07, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- Delete. Recommend to IZAK that if he wants to complain at length about conduct, take it to an RFC rather than cluttering an AFD debate with the matter. - Jmabel | Talk 17:25, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- Comment Jmabel: I asked IZAK earlier to take it to an RFC rather than on here but he doesn't listen. MetsFan76 18:55, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- Hi Mets: Don't misunderstand me. Notch it up to my sense of mercy that I have not gone the RFC route at this time, which I consider to be a very serious procedure. I would much prefer that User:FrummerThanThou would moderate his ways and avoid his irresponsible style of editing and writing , with which I have unfortunately become well-acquainted in recent weeks. IZAK 06:32, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- IZAK: Suggesting that someone gets blocked is also very serious, as you have done with frummer. I had a conversation with him last night...he seems like a nice guy, although a little misguided lately. I think he needs a break for a bit, but not a block. Weren't you blocked in the past? I'm sure it wasn't fun. As such, stating that he should be blocked might not be considered mercy as you were in that situation. C'mon...it's the holiday season. This isn't necessary right now. =) MetsFan76 13:13, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- Hi Mets: Sure he's a nice guy, that's not the issue, it's his wild pattern of editing, writing, nominating, and un-nominating articles relating to Jews and Judaism back and forth, that I have had the dubious pleasure of having to struggle with. I am not judging him as a person, I am judging his work, that's all. Furthermore, it is out of a sense of responsibility and of not wishing to see Wikipedia and its Jewish content articles mangled (as Frummer tends to do) that I am keeping a careful watch on what he does with Judaic articles. I can't watch his edits to non-Jewish articles, let other people take him up on that. And as for my history on Wikipedia, I started in December of 2002, four years ago [7] and at that time we had a number of virulent and scheming antisemites who were sabotaging Jewish and Israeli articles and in the course of a bloody slug fest over a long time I got blocked for about a week for repeatedly calling them antisemites. (Since then I am NOT that blunt, as there are more ways than one to skin a cat), and eventually a few of those characters were in turn blocked and banned for a long time as their true colors and Jew-hatred eventually did them in -- so I don't think that you or Frummer want to be gloating in their company -- nor do I suggest that anyone open that can of worms, they'll just get burned (by the worms ;-})! And yes, Happy Hanukkah to all! IZAK 14:24, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- Hi IZAK: I am definitely not gloating in anyone's company and this is not about anti-semitism. This is about how you tend to lose control way too much. Instead of jumping on someone, why don't you take the time to find out what the problem is, instead of plastering it all over wikipedia. Obviously, if someone is deliberately causing problems (i.e. frummer), then they should be dealt with in the proper forum. This is an AfD, not The Jerry Springer Show. Anyway, my email is on here so maybe we should continue this through there. All I can see of our debate is just clutter. And also a Merry Christmas! MetsFan76 15:03, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- Hi Mets: Sure he's a nice guy, that's not the issue, it's his wild pattern of editing, writing, nominating, and un-nominating articles relating to Jews and Judaism back and forth, that I have had the dubious pleasure of having to struggle with. I am not judging him as a person, I am judging his work, that's all. Furthermore, it is out of a sense of responsibility and of not wishing to see Wikipedia and its Jewish content articles mangled (as Frummer tends to do) that I am keeping a careful watch on what he does with Judaic articles. I can't watch his edits to non-Jewish articles, let other people take him up on that. And as for my history on Wikipedia, I started in December of 2002, four years ago [7] and at that time we had a number of virulent and scheming antisemites who were sabotaging Jewish and Israeli articles and in the course of a bloody slug fest over a long time I got blocked for about a week for repeatedly calling them antisemites. (Since then I am NOT that blunt, as there are more ways than one to skin a cat), and eventually a few of those characters were in turn blocked and banned for a long time as their true colors and Jew-hatred eventually did them in -- so I don't think that you or Frummer want to be gloating in their company -- nor do I suggest that anyone open that can of worms, they'll just get burned (by the worms ;-})! And yes, Happy Hanukkah to all! IZAK 14:24, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- IZAK: Suggesting that someone gets blocked is also very serious, as you have done with frummer. I had a conversation with him last night...he seems like a nice guy, although a little misguided lately. I think he needs a break for a bit, but not a block. Weren't you blocked in the past? I'm sure it wasn't fun. As such, stating that he should be blocked might not be considered mercy as you were in that situation. C'mon...it's the holiday season. This isn't necessary right now. =) MetsFan76 13:13, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- Hi Mets: Don't misunderstand me. Notch it up to my sense of mercy that I have not gone the RFC route at this time, which I consider to be a very serious procedure. I would much prefer that User:FrummerThanThou would moderate his ways and avoid his irresponsible style of editing and writing , with which I have unfortunately become well-acquainted in recent weeks. IZAK 06:32, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- Comment Jmabel: I asked IZAK earlier to take it to an RFC rather than on here but he doesn't listen. MetsFan76 18:55, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- Deleted and Salt Well, ignorning the 'he said, she said' nonsense that most everyone above is embroyaled in, I'll look at the article and base my comments on it's merits. I read the article and the links. There is no mention in the linked article about this airline. I did some checking and the IATA code "SR" is not registered with the IATA.[8] The same with the ICAO code, NSH is not registered to any airline. I checked and there are no notices about this airline in the industry (as a privite IFR pilot, it's very easy to check this kind of thing). --Brian (How am I doing?) 20:12, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. SlimVirgin (talk) 20:41, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- Delete, not notable, WP:V. JFW | T@lk 22:14, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom, non notable and massive WP:V problems. let rfc deal with salting issues. SkierRMH 01:49, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- Delete... the article makes a nice-looking, i.e., well-formed, stub, but it fails even the most basic criteria for notability. It is not an Israeli airline as the article asserts, it is, rather, an airline idea. That's nice, but unless it gains notability [which it has not] for being an idea, failed or otherwise, it's not valid article material. I wish the idea the best of luck, and once it takes off [pun intended], I'll be more than happy to support the article, even as a stub. Tomertalk 02:08, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per Brian. JChap2007 02:27, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per Bschott. Jayjg (talk) 03:45, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- delete When they start flying, we can reconsider.DGG 06:32, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- Speedy delete, absolutely non-notable; CSD A7 sets in nicely. — Nearly Headless Nick {C} {L} 06:44, 19 December 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.
