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. --Tikiwont 13:35, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Starair[edit]

An aircraft operator with one business jet and one helicopter, but with no sources which would afford this operator notability, thereby failing WP:V. The existence of an ICAO code and callsign should not be considered to give notability as these codes can be given to freight agents, aircraft brokers, and other non-notable entities. Russavia 16:53, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Carter | Talk to me 20:28, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep~~ and expand, meets the notability. [1] [2]. There is also another news and articles here. Carlosguitar 20:40, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The Forbes article is for Starair (an Indonesian company, not the Irish one). The DEFRA page doesn't give it notability. And Google news finds a single article which comes up with a 404 erorr when viewed, so we have no idea if it is trivial coverage or substantial --Russavia 12:33, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

True, I will be neutral now. Carlosguitar 21:34, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not notable.--Bedivere 21:07, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep~~ as per Carlosguitar. There is enough secondary coverage of this company to demonstrate notability. --Oakshade 23:05, 16 October 2007 (UTC). Change to Neutral as the Forbes article is about a different company. --Oakshade 21:21, 18 October 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.