Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AIRLINE Simulation

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. j⚛e decker ^talk 05:17, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

AIRLINE Simulation

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

Non-notable software game (proposed deletion removed by originator) MilborneOne (talk) 13:35, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. MilborneOne (talk) 13:49, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:22, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No worthwhile redirect targets. The full name is still unclear to me, which doesn't help, but by any stretch, I'm not finding any secondary sourcing on this with or without the "zimmerman" or "commodore" attributes to help. Of the sources in the article, one is a PowerPoint apparently given by the creator (primary source) and the others are inaccessible or just not sources. No hits in a video game reliable sources search. Article topic lacks significant coverage from reliable, independent sources. (?) Please ping me if more (non-English and offline) sources show in the future. czar ♔ 15:28, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Dialectric (talk) 17:00, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - It is impossible to tell what is valid in the article, and what may be original research. However, I'm not finding any extra sourcing on this whatsoever either, although this is complicated somewhat by the incredibly generic name. Everything in the article does not appear to count towards any notability guideline; one is apparently a primary source, two are not going to count in any way (individual profile pages of University members or just name dropping universities) and the other is impossible to assess for its reliability. No valid redirect target, so this has to go. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 19:57, 16 November 2014 (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.