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The result was speedy keep (withdrawn by nominator). --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:35, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sanya Hongtangwan Airport (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

No WP:RS. Closest is: https://centreforaviation.com/data/profiles/newairports/new-sanya-airport Nominating as per WP:CRYSTAL. —usernamekiran(talk) 11:54, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 12:08, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. This is not WP:CRYSTAL. It a major ($15-billion) infrastructure project which is already under construction, with piles already being driven for a new artificial island. It's easy to find sources:

1. http://www.chinatravelnews.com/article/84727
2. https://centreforaviation.com/data/profiles/newairports/new-sanya-airport
3. http://www.enr.com/articles/42073-dodecakon-is-driving-gigantic-piles-in-china
4. http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/business/2017-03/24/content_28659725.htm
5. http://www.scmp.com/news/china/article/1593841/chinese-tourist-hub-sanya-wants-reclaimed-land-build-more-airports
6. background at https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/28/business/international/chinese-tourists-pump-cash-into-a-hot-destination-china.html?_r=0
7. http://www.scmp.com/news/china/article/1988767/dangers-land-reclamation-sanya-aims-create-new-artificial-island-house
8. http://www.scmp.com/news/china/article/1988768/tourism-bottleneck-relief-way-work-due-start-new-sanya-airport-later-year
9. mentioned at http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/cndy/2017-05/15/content_29344997.htm

There's plenty more coverage out there. It took me only a few minutes to find those sources, and per WP:BEFORE the nominator should have searched for sources before making this nomination.

I invite Usernamekiran to withdraw this nomination. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:22, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@BrownHairedGirl: I did search before nominating it. I even mentioned one source above. —usernamekiran(talk) 12:27, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment: In the light of reliable sources being available, I withdraw the nomination in goodfaith. I apologise for the mess. It was unintentional. —usernamekiran(talk) 12:27, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:34, 29 May 2017 (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.