AfDs for this article:
The given page title was invalid or had an inter-language or inter-wiki prefix.
It may contain one or more characters which cannot be used in titles.
- View log • ) – (
- (Find sources: )
- Comment: Remember that being an orphan (WP:ORPHS) or the potential for growth are not the focus of the AFD. The article seems, however, to fail WP:GNG which is a relevant point. Also seems to be a potential ad, which is not encyclopedic. I lean towards "delete" but I have no grounds at the moment to confirm it. Some of the information found on a simple google search seems to lean me towards "keeping and expanding" the article. So for now I abstain from expressing my view. -- Loukinho (talk) 19:14, 20 June 2012 (UTC).
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:09, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:09, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
- Delete I don't think this data template subject merits its own wikipedia article considering its been an orphan since 2010. It will likely remain a stub which won't serve anyone's encyclopedic interests. --Artene50 (talk) 08:49, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
| This article uses material from the Wikipedia article Articles for deletion/PECTAB, that was deleted or is being discussed for deletion, which is released under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.