Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HIAir - Hayat International Airways

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. -- Cirt (talk) 00:16, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

HIAir - Hayat International Airways[edit]

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

I have declined an A7 speedy deletion of this article, because airlines are frequently kept, and there is one source (Daily Telegraph) which seems to offer some coverage. I therefore feel that it should not be deleted without discussion. Even so, I don't think the airline meets the relevant notability standards. It is essentially a small air taxi company, operating small aircraft, not a scheduled airline which has been the subject of widespread media attention. The airline is less than a month old, and I think an article at this point is premature. Sjakkalle (Check!) 16:27, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - it would be helpful if an admin could review the previously deleted versions and pull some of the old sources that cast doubt on the legitimacy of this venture. 69.181.249.92 (talk) 21:03, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - As far as I am aware, the company do not actually own any aircraft themselves, they essential "resell" the services of other company, an air-broker if you like. If this is correct, then I believe that the company does not meet the criteria to be kept. --95.149.228.221 (talk) 08:27, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:29, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:29, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Cirt (talk) 00:13, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Surely the lack of discussion illustrates the point that this article may not meet nobility standards? 178.96.45.36 (talk) 13:18, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Generally, lack of discussion indicates that people either don't care either way, or that they are having a tough time making up their minds. I wouldn't read any consensus out from the mere lack of discussion. Sjakkalle (Check!) 15:30, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - I agree that that is usually the case. However, this article is about a company which has barely existed for a month or so; I would say that the lack of response indicates that either very few people have noticed the deletion debate (as very few people have viewed the article's main page) or that people do not care either way. If the latter is the case, then I believe that there is a genuine case for deletion if it cannot be proved that the article meets notability standards. 95.149.228.221 (talk) 16:19, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete not really an airline just a company that will lease aircraft or seats from other operators, bit like a tour operator. Looks like it will not breach the 19-seater size to it doesnt need a licence either as an airline or a charter. Cant actually find any evidence that it is a registered company either, nothing with that name listed by Companies House. MilborneOne (talk) 18:04, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: The original article created by User:HIAir was not that different from the current and did not provide any different references. MilborneOne (talk) 18:13, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - After considering the limited sources available, I firmly believe that this article is of insufficient notability to merit a Wikipedia article. In fact, I quite agree with MilborneOne; HIAir is not (technically speaking) and "airline". It owns no aircraft, has not had any customers to date and is, quite simply, extremely insignificant in the airline industry. I really cannot see a need for an entry on wikipedia; most people would be able to set up such a "company" in a matter of weeks, ie. without owning aircraft, having had any customers and having arranged other companies to provide the aircraft, flights and staff etc. I think this shows how insignificant this company is and how, therefore, it lacks notability of sufficient degree to warrant an article on Wikipedia (or indeed any encyclopaedia for that matter). --95.149.228.221 (talk) 00:10, 3 September 2010 (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.