Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Esterhazy Airport
Source: 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 KEEP. —]
Esterhazy Airport
- Esterhazy Airport (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
Extremely minor airport with no claim for notability.
talk) 01:22, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
- Keep- It's an airport. It has a 3000 foot runway. It is, in my view, notable. SeanMD80talk | contribs 01:57, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge and redirect to Esterhazy, Saskatchewan. The information will fit well and I seriously doubt anybody is going to look for the airport and not want to know about the town. Torc2 (talk) 02:12, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Isn't large enough to have an IATA code, probably not notable. -- talk) 03:50, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. I believe that all airports are notable. However, if the consensus is to delete or merge, then consideration should be given to the 100s of similar airport articles. Disclosure, I created the article and left a message at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airports#Are all airports notable. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 06:53, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Simply put, most if not all airports are notable. In many cases, they are engines that keep many communities alive. In remote areas of Canada, don't know if this is one, they provide access to critical medical services. They also are the major provider of tourists in many remote or hard to reach areas. So simply being small or in an out of the way place does not make a minor airport not notable. Small does make on line sourcing difficult. Vegaswikian (talk) 07:11, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - Consensus has found that all airports are notable. The only airports I recall getting deleted weren't really airports but unpaved landing strips. This airport is not one of those. --Oakshade (talk) 07:17, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Any proper airport has to be notable in its own right. A 3,000 foot runway is a lot of tarmac. Nick mallory (talk) 10:22, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep All approved airports are notable, if the field can get a Location ID from the governing body of it's country then it's good enough to have an article here! --Trashbag (talk) 00:44, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing as Keep. —]
- 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.