Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of fighter aircraft

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. Secret ^account 18:49, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comparison of fighter aircraft[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is simply WP:Listcruft Roger (talk) 13:08, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I have not dug into the history of this article, but it seems like a properly formatted table like this might be useful in some other article. I agree that it's not suitable for its own, but maybe as part of Fighter aircraft or some such? Of course, there's that whole referencing thing... UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did
Comment Could it be merged to List of fighter aircraft? Not being sourced is a problem, but most of the info is in the articles on the individual planes. --Colapeninsula (talk) 13:51, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - fails as OR, no given criteria for selection or whether what is being compared is comparable, nor if Reliable sources would compare. GraemeLeggett (talk) 15:04, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:41, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:41, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:41, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per my recent but removed prod comment Unreferenced and random comparison articles are not really encyclopedic also note it is unlikely to be of any use anywhere else either, MilborneOne (talk) 18:47, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Snow Delete - what are we meant to compare? Wingspan? What is there to compare among aircraft designed at different times in the last 40+ years to do different jobs for different military forces? The reader is left to do all of the comparing, but there is no context. YSSYguy (talk) 22:53, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Snow delete inappropriate OR. Buckshot06 (talk) 23:36, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Yes ma'am, the data on the MiG is inaccurate [...] we happened to see a MiG 28 do a 4g negative dive."

—Maverick, Top Gun

Snow delete - why no comparison of pilot comfort? Or of cabin paint colour? What about ease-of-access? Or appropriateness of use as a subject in photography? What I want to know is; which is easiest to park? Stalwart111 00:27, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- That'd be the Tomcat. Swing-wings, baby! - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 11:13, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See, that seems logical, but then I saw Arnold Schwarzenegger land a Harrier Jump Jet in a busy public street in True Lies, so now I'm not so sure... Stalwart111 23:07, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination Nick-D (talk) 00:44, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete with a helping of WP:SNOW. Articles exactly like this have been deleted before on exactly the same grounds: WP:OR/WP:SYNTH-ish cruftiness. It's a good idea, but impossible to properly compose while meeting V, N, and RS. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 11:13, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - unsourced and falls afoul of WP:Listcruft and WP:Indiscriminate. - Ahunt (talk) 14:42, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - random assortment of aircraft with abritrary statistics, it is a simply cruft list. Kyteto (talk) 18:13, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - meaningless OR list.--Staberinde (talk) 16:01, 11 March 2013 (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.