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 no consensus. W.marsh 17:30, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kiwijet[edit]

Kiwijet (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

No sources, airline's web site at www.kiwijet.net is not even active yet. Prod was removed along with other templates with no improvements to the article. gadfium 08:25, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Fails WP:CRYSTAL. BTLizard 08:39, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete The article is talking about what they are planning to do and gives accusations with no support for them. Needs to go or be sourced. Slavlin 18:51, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep. Needs to be sourced if kept, here's a start: [1]. -- Hawaiian717 23:13, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's just a reprinted press release. All it proves is that the airline actually exists, at least on paper. I think the article is premature until such time as the airline starts hiring staff and leasing planes.-gadfium 01:25, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Agreed, probably not the best source but it's something to get started with. Google News has more: [2] Hawaiian717 15:56, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, Hawaiian717 has the source. It's one, but it is probably enough to get out of crystalballery. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 00:11, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. The article has been cleaned up, retagged and gotten a few references. Still needs work. Vegaswikian 01:18, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I appreciate the cleanup, but it looks like we are reading the sources differently. Kiwijet is a proposed competitor to Air New Zealand, and ANZ is considering launching its own low-cost airline in response. I've adjusted the article according to my understanding. I still think this article is premature.-gadfium 06:24, 20 May 2007 (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.