Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nantucket Airlines

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 merge to Cape Air. MBisanz ^talk 17:10, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nantucket Airlines[edit]

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

Does this have sufficient notability separate from Cape Air? If not, it should be redirected. SSTflyer 10:07, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. SSTflyer 10:08, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. SSTflyer 10:08, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. SSTflyer 10:08, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:46, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:46, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Being a subsidiary of a company does not disqualify it from meeting WP:CORP standards. I don't understand the reason behind this nomination. And Adoil Descended (talk) 15:00, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - No evidence company has received significant coverage in reliable sources. --Hirolovesswords (talk) 00:29, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to Cape Air. Although being a subsidiary doesn't disqualify the subject from having an article, there still is no need for a stand-alone article. The portions of the instant article that are not already duplicated at the target article could readily be added to it. NewYorkActuary (talk) 03:02, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect as nothing actually suggesting its own notable article, imaginably best connected to the other company. SwisterTwister talk 05:42, 27 May 2016 (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.