Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Computerized Airline Sales and Marketing Association

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. Consensus is sourcing is insufficient. If someone feels like they can find offline sources and wants the draft, just ping me. No need for REFUND. Star Mississippi 01:53, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Computerized Airline Sales and Marketing Association[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

No significant coverage in reliable sources. In fact, I'm barely able to find any references conforming that this org exists, — BillHPike (talk, contribs) 23:55, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Advertising, and Aviation. Shellwood (talk) 00:22, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – From old press releases ([1], [2], [3]), it looks like this association was active from 1979 to somewhere around 2014; the official website was still active in January 2014, but appears to have gone dead later that year. I'm guessing that any RS coverage is likely to be offline. –FlyingAce^✈hello 04:58, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep I was working in the airline industry when I created this article. I thought it was useful to have a central place where information about CASMA could be collected. To FlyingAce's point, a Wikipedia article becomes even more valuable for industry history when sources become harder to find. But I don't feel strongly about it. --Macrakis (talk) 13:46, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've also added some more info with footnotes. Many of the sources are admittedly press releases and thus primary sources. --Macrakis (talk) 14:16, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I can find a good number of press releases (and re-publishing of press releases) but the only non-press release article I find is the last one in the article's ref list. Note that most of the references, like the Yahoo News one, turn out to be press releases. Lamona (talk) 02:48, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Press releases don't make the organization notable. Without any reliable secondary sources, it fails WP:GNG. Fred Zepelin (talk) 20:30, 22 March 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.