Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Davis Heliport

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. X clamation point 03:39, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Davis Heliport

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

Fails WP:N and WP:RS. Directory listings do not constitute notability. One helipad owned by a company is not a notable helipad. Delete Undead Warrior (talk) 22:04, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. -- Undead Warrior (talk) 22:06, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - fails WP:N. Aboutmovies (talk) 22:29, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Agree lack of notability. brianlucas (talk) 00:40, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Nothing notable about a concrete pad big enough for 1 helicopter. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 04:38, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question before you say delete Whats going on here? Category:Heliports in Oregon, but I don't see any other states, unless they're named a different syntax for the cat? Are these like Olympians and airports, automatically notable? rootology (C)(T) 05:24, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - You would need to ask the category creator, but I believe that category was created to move all the Oregon heliports out of the main Heliports in the US category. One editor made stubs for every single heliport/airport in Oregon, so there were a lot, and that's why the got moved and why other states did not need them (not enough articles to populate the category). And no, unlike Olympians that are notable per WP:BIO's athlete inclusion criteria, all airports/heliports are not inherently notable. Aboutmovies (talk) 06:14, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - You're right, I created the category because I found out that Category:Heliports in the United States was full of a bunch of stubs for questionably notable heliports in Oregon and those stubs were obscuring other articles that people might be looking for in the US category. If other states had several heliports i would have created cats for them, too. There's probably only one or two stubs in the Oregon category that are potentially notable on their own. My personal opinion is that the majority of them should be merged to articles for their associated facility, like a hospital, TV Station or other associated facility. ie Trojan Heliport to Trojan Nuclear Power Plant and so on. --Dual Freq (talk) 00:24, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. JavierMC 09:55, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no independent notability. I did find a few news articles about/mentioning B L Ranch and I would say to merge it to a ranch article, but none appears to exist. --Dual Freq (talk) 00:24, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Prior AfD records at WikiProject Airports indicate general consensus that private-use airports (ones which are not open to the public) fall below the threshold of notability regardless of required government filings, such as with the FAA for US airports. (That's the basis for private-use airports being considered non-notable in the proposed guideline at WP:WikiProject Airports/Notability.) Therefore fails WP:N. Ikluft (talk) 06:59, 7 October 2008 (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.