Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SATUMA Mukhbar

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 17:10, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

SATUMA Mukhbar

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

No real coverage found. Fails WP:GNG. Störm (talk) 16:12, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Per nomination Adamgerber80 (talk) 17:56, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 15:59, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 15:59, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 16:05, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: In general, it's long-standing consensus that aircraft that have flown are included in Wikipedia. However, in this case, even leaving aside the thorny issue of where the line is with UAVs vis-a-vis manned aircraft when it comes to that, it doesn't appear to be verifiable that this UAV has flown, as opposed to being an entry with a pretty picture in a manufacturer's catalogue. If anybody can find "yes, it flew" evidence, ping me and I'll happily change my !vote, but until then - - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 20:48, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Sourced from manufacturer (404 dead link). Scaled down version of other UAV (SATUMA Jasoos) which might have not entered production. Mainly passing mentions - [1] [2] [3] as yet another UAV in the lineup of the company. Possible to merge some content to SATUMA Jasoos if we pass WP:V that this is indeed a scaled-down model (the passing mentions above do not specify this).Icewhiz (talk) 07:50, 22 November 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.