Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oneworld destinations (2nd nomination)

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 all. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:01, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oneworld destinations

Apart from not having a single valid reference, Oneworld, Star Alliance and Skyteam are not airlines, they don't have any destinations, and most importantly, Wikipedia is not an avenue for marketing. A valid reference is one that doesn't contain simple Oneworld websiteor the like Россавиа ^Диалог 23:31, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related pages because they too are alliances not airlines and suffer the same problems as the nomination article:

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. -- Россавиа ^Диалог 23:40, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete All - per nom. these are not airlies, so they don't really have destinations --T-rex 16:54, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete All - The article pages of these ventures link the airlines involve which have their destinations listed. There is no need for the additional list, borders marketing but besides that it's just duplicate information. Rasadam (talk) 10:30, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep - Not really sure how this is marketing (some of the articles on the alliances themselves border on marketing, though). The reference issue can very easily be fixed; all three alliances publish timetables, which for this should be sufficient, since the information is entirely objective and not subject to argument. If someone insists on an additional source, OAG also has the information. DB (talk) 22:56, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately a lot of the airline articles border on marketing. Additionally, in regards to these 3 articles, WP:NOT#TRAVEL also comes into play, as WP is not a travel guide. If the 3 alliances publish timetables, that is great, but they do not require a separate list. A link to their timetable on the main article is perhaps an idea. In regards to OAG, two things, firstly, it is a paid-for service and makes checking for WP:V purposes difficult, and secondly, flights are not listed on OAG (or any other service that I can think of) as "Oneworld" flights, but flights of the actual carrier, and codeshares (if they exist on the particular flight being searched). --Россавиа ^Диалог 21:49, 3 July 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.