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.
No reason this meets
Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). Minor company that made few minor flying contraptions, no references to speak of, except few obscure mentions in niche flying enthusiast works. Leaving aside notability of its products, notability is not inherited, so this entry has to stand on its own. And it clearly fails at that. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus|
reply here 08:36, 12 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep not really less notable than others in
Category:Aircraft manufacturers of Poland. Your terminology of "few minor flying contraptions" isn't neutral. They make VLA/LSA certified aircraft, more notable than paragliders manufacturers in my opinion. They exposed in
AERO Friedrichshafen 2016. Small company, but that's the typical VLA manufacturer size. --
Marc Lacoste (
talk) 09:14, 13 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep - I have expanded the article and added three independent third party refs. It now meets notability requirements. In future it would be better to bring these sorts of issues up at
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aircraft so that they can be fixed rather than wasting time on AfDs. -
Ahunt (
talk) 11:57, 13 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep a sourced company that has produced any aircraft that has flown is normally considered notable enough for an article.
MilborneOne (
talk) 12:05, 13 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep It is a properly sourced stub article about a manufacturer of certified aircraft.
Roger (Dodger67) (
talk) 12:08, 13 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep Meets notability and is a viable stub.
Samf4u (
talk) 12:17, 13 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Comment: I would re-name to Aero sp. z o.o. as per legal name. Ltd ending is not a valid/legal trading name.
Nicnote •
ask me a question •
contributions 21:17, 13 April 2017 (UTC)reply
The company website uses "
Aero AT" as its full name, so I was planning on moving the article to that title once the AfD was closed, which could be soon if it keeps "snowing" here. -
BilCat (
talk) 02:43, 14 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Good idea. -
Ahunt (
talk) 12:39, 14 April 2017 (UTC)reply
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.
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.
No reason this meets
Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). Minor company that made few minor flying contraptions, no references to speak of, except few obscure mentions in niche flying enthusiast works. Leaving aside notability of its products, notability is not inherited, so this entry has to stand on its own. And it clearly fails at that. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus|
reply here 08:36, 12 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep not really less notable than others in
Category:Aircraft manufacturers of Poland. Your terminology of "few minor flying contraptions" isn't neutral. They make VLA/LSA certified aircraft, more notable than paragliders manufacturers in my opinion. They exposed in
AERO Friedrichshafen 2016. Small company, but that's the typical VLA manufacturer size. --
Marc Lacoste (
talk) 09:14, 13 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep - I have expanded the article and added three independent third party refs. It now meets notability requirements. In future it would be better to bring these sorts of issues up at
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aircraft so that they can be fixed rather than wasting time on AfDs. -
Ahunt (
talk) 11:57, 13 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep a sourced company that has produced any aircraft that has flown is normally considered notable enough for an article.
MilborneOne (
talk) 12:05, 13 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep It is a properly sourced stub article about a manufacturer of certified aircraft.
Roger (Dodger67) (
talk) 12:08, 13 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep Meets notability and is a viable stub.
Samf4u (
talk) 12:17, 13 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Comment: I would re-name to Aero sp. z o.o. as per legal name. Ltd ending is not a valid/legal trading name.
Nicnote •
ask me a question •
contributions 21:17, 13 April 2017 (UTC)reply
The company website uses "
Aero AT" as its full name, so I was planning on moving the article to that title once the AfD was closed, which could be soon if it keeps "snowing" here. -
BilCat (
talk) 02:43, 14 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Good idea. -
Ahunt (
talk) 12:39, 14 April 2017 (UTC)reply
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.