Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PacificFlier (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. Sandstein 08:48, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

PacificFlier[edit]

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

Does not meet WP:GNG or WP:CORPDEPTH, per several source searches. The first AfD discussion was closed as no consensus in August 2011. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:25, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:26, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:26, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Oceania-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:26, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete a one plane airline that existed for 5 months. Fails WP:CORP. LibStar (talk) 13:48, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and this should've honestly been either PRODed to begin with in 2011 or relisted at that time, nothing at all convincing and this is simple clear close. SwisterTwister talk 22:04, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- typical advertorial with insufficient sources to meet GNG and CORPDEPTH. K.e.coffman (talk) 06:51, 7 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete- Simply not notable enough. Class455 (talk) 00:05, 12 August 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.