The result was delete. Consensus was that, even after a rewrite, this article had substantial WP:SYNTH, WP:IINFO and WP:N issues. The rewritten article was mostly about pop-media coverage of some specific subjects related to the airline, such as its 9/11 flights, and I'll restore the history on request if it is shown that consensus exists for a full or partial merger to somewhere else. Sandstein 23:34, 8 July 2008 (UTC) reply
This was created by an editor who wanted to make it more difficult to delete items already removed from United Airlines#In popular culture. Most of the information there is original research involving nonnotable, trivial or passing displays of United Airlines in the media. Anything that isn't should be placed back into the popular culture section at United Airlines. Since that section currently only has two entries, there was never a reason to fork it in the first place. Cumulus Clouds ( talk) 16:49, 3 July 2008 (UTC) reply
“ | The Softbot model manager performs fast inference
on local closed-world information; if the user later specifies that the carrier must be United Airlines, the Softbot need not access SABRE again. But if the Softbot i s informed of the creation of a new flight, or a change in the desired destination, it retracts its conclusion of local closed-world information and gathers more information. |
” |
Delete a couple of years back almost every article had its "popular culture" section, where inane trivia were added. While some one has provided some serious academic content for this page, this bulk of it is still a list of trivial allusions in films etc. We might conceivably have an article Airlines in popular culture, but I do not see the need to have one on one particular airline or even every one of 1004 airlines (or however many there may be). Peterkingiron ( talk) 20:42, 5 July 2008 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Consensus was that, even after a rewrite, this article had substantial WP:SYNTH, WP:IINFO and WP:N issues. The rewritten article was mostly about pop-media coverage of some specific subjects related to the airline, such as its 9/11 flights, and I'll restore the history on request if it is shown that consensus exists for a full or partial merger to somewhere else. Sandstein 23:34, 8 July 2008 (UTC) reply
This was created by an editor who wanted to make it more difficult to delete items already removed from United Airlines#In popular culture. Most of the information there is original research involving nonnotable, trivial or passing displays of United Airlines in the media. Anything that isn't should be placed back into the popular culture section at United Airlines. Since that section currently only has two entries, there was never a reason to fork it in the first place. Cumulus Clouds ( talk) 16:49, 3 July 2008 (UTC) reply
“ | The Softbot model manager performs fast inference
on local closed-world information; if the user later specifies that the carrier must be United Airlines, the Softbot need not access SABRE again. But if the Softbot i s informed of the creation of a new flight, or a change in the desired destination, it retracts its conclusion of local closed-world information and gathers more information. |
” |
Delete a couple of years back almost every article had its "popular culture" section, where inane trivia were added. While some one has provided some serious academic content for this page, this bulk of it is still a list of trivial allusions in films etc. We might conceivably have an article Airlines in popular culture, but I do not see the need to have one on one particular airline or even every one of 1004 airlines (or however many there may be). Peterkingiron ( talk) 20:42, 5 July 2008 (UTC) reply