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 .
✗plicit 11:55, 21 April 2023 (UTC)reply
Short-lived and discontinued air route, most of the article describes re-routing after discontinuation. It wasn't even the first international route into either Canberra or Wellington, although it received some media attention at its launch, its not really any more notable than any other new airline route. A stand alone article is not required per
Wikipedia:NOTCATALOG,
WP:MILL, as the content is already covered in sufficient detail in the articles for Canberra and Wellington airports
Dfadden (
talk) 05:43, 14 April 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete per nomination. As noted, this is covered in the articles on the airports and doesn't really justify a standalone article.
Nick-D (
talk) 09:50, 14 April 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete we generally don't create articles for individual air routes. Especially for ones that only lasted 2 years.
LibStar (
talk) 10:36, 14 April 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete per the excellent rationale from the nominator. This is already covered in the airport articles and wasn't notable in the first place.
Nomader (
talk) 17:07, 14 April 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete as this does not need a stand alone article and it is sufficiently covered in the
Wellington Airport article
NealeWellington (
talk) 08:25, 16 April 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete. Air routes are most often non-notable. Specifics of historic destinations are discussed on airport and airline articles.
Ajf773 (
talk) 19:05, 18 April 2023 (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.
The result was delete .
✗plicit 11:55, 21 April 2023 (UTC)reply
Short-lived and discontinued air route, most of the article describes re-routing after discontinuation. It wasn't even the first international route into either Canberra or Wellington, although it received some media attention at its launch, its not really any more notable than any other new airline route. A stand alone article is not required per
Wikipedia:NOTCATALOG,
WP:MILL, as the content is already covered in sufficient detail in the articles for Canberra and Wellington airports
Dfadden (
talk) 05:43, 14 April 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete per nomination. As noted, this is covered in the articles on the airports and doesn't really justify a standalone article.
Nick-D (
talk) 09:50, 14 April 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete we generally don't create articles for individual air routes. Especially for ones that only lasted 2 years.
LibStar (
talk) 10:36, 14 April 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete per the excellent rationale from the nominator. This is already covered in the airport articles and wasn't notable in the first place.
Nomader (
talk) 17:07, 14 April 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete as this does not need a stand alone article and it is sufficiently covered in the
Wellington Airport article
NealeWellington (
talk) 08:25, 16 April 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete. Air routes are most often non-notable. Specifics of historic destinations are discussed on airport and airline articles.
Ajf773 (
talk) 19:05, 18 April 2023 (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.