Knowledge (XXG)

:Articles for deletion/Singapore Airlines awards and accolades - Knowledge (XXG)

Source 📝

416:
go back over 75 years of history). It should not matter if Aeroflot is noted for its service quality or not, but a list of awards should be appropriate if it is for SIA. The mere fact that you bring up this point is evidence that there is a high POV in that article, or at the very least, behind the article, for if you were of the belief that such a list is required for SIA, then you should also be of the belief it is required for every other airline out there which has received some award, no matter how obscure that award may be. It also seems a tad strange that it is necessary to have a huge list of received awards which have been ripped directly from the SIA website, then at the bottom of the article is a link to the complete list on the SIA website. Why not write a brief synopsis within the main
399:, outright deletion of the entire article is not the only solution to resolve a small factual error. If you are going to attempt a list of all awards won by Aeroflot, please consider if Aeroflot itself is a notable airline in terms of service quality, and a trendsetter in the global aviation industry. Listing all awards won by Aeroflot is perhaps of little encyclopedic value, but when Singapore Airlines claims to be the most awarded airline in the world, there is a far higher likelihood for users to question the validity of this statement, and to consider the range of awards won. Avoid assuming that just because XXX Airline has an awards page, all other airlines must have one too. Ultimately, notability is still key.-- 378:. Allowing the article as it is to stand will only cause confusion amongst users who are using this site for it's encyclopaedic content, as they will only be met with nothing more than an advertisement. And where does it stop? I could easily make a list of hundreds of awards which Aeroflot has had bestowed on it going back to 1932. Does such a list honestly make much different to encyclopaedic value, particularly when a brief summary can be placed in the main article, along with a 395:
consideration for the topic's notability seems a tad insulting to mature contributors, myself included. I agree that the two awards you mention are probably insignificant in the global arena, but a quick look at the list, and in comprison to the official site, shows that the list actually includes all awards received. The opening sentence which once appeared in the main article for a partial list was not updated when it was moved to the expanded list in a new page. As in
449:. Please inform if any of those statements with regards to SIA are not supported by third-party publications. Please advise if there are third-party publications stating that Aeroflot blazes the trail in terms of service quality for the global aviation scene, and is well-respected the world over as a company. If so, you are most welcome to add these info to the 453:
page. I find it curious to observe that you appear to be demanding that sourced, verified, positive comments about certain airlines be removed by flagging them as "POV", just so that they all read and sound similar to airlines which are far less accredited for their service quality standards. If this
415:
is also quite insulting. But I do think that you have proven my point with what you have written above. Particularly your comment about whether Aeroflot (used for this argument) is 'notable' for service quality, or a trendsetter in the global aviation industry (which it is if you get rid of POV and
228:
If the idea to keep the main article succint by moving content to secondary pages ends up with the later getting deleted, then we are back to square one. I appears to me that you arent too familiar with the overall setup of some aviation-related articles, and the history behind some of their
308:
as it is conter-productive to delete it as it has been made to serve a purpose and will cause more problems in the future. But it should be changed a bit, maybe a blurb summarizing it's service and quality at the start and then a list of only the 'notable' awards given in the last few years
394:
There is perhaps a rather blurred distinction between "fanboy" topics and topics which commands singificant interest amongst professionals, academics, and the general public, thus fueling extensive writeups about them. But to trivalise efforts of wikipedians as merely "fanboy" without due
454:
is your hidden agenda, then I would think the deletion of this article is itself setting a bad precedent amongst users attempting to use wikipedia's NPOV policy as an excuse to censor out positive (and potentially negative) opinions, depite these opinions being verified and sourced.--
288:. Note also that it is common for a major topic to be covered by several articles with notability inherited from the main article. This avoids unnecessary cycle of splitting and merging. This is generally acceptable as long as the sub-topic is non-trivial, e.g. 444:
only three months prior?) Now if it was due to POV over whether Aeroflot is more notable than SIA in terms of service quality to the point of actually considering my statements to be POV, then I am simply going to fall back on a fundamental police:
366:, the room would be scratching their heads wondering just who this organisation is, and what makes their award so significant. I know I would be, and I can guarantee so would the CEO of SQ. The list as given is a verbatim copy from this 476:, main article is lengthy enough. A longer paragraph should be written, maybe summarising some of the major awards. Listing the notable awards as what Tom said would be better and this will not be mistaken as a directory. 433: 396: 321:
This is indeed a very workable idea. There is scope for some content to be added to a simple listing of awards. This should help set the context for otherwise clueless users who think this is merely a standalone
263:
as an alternative but what happens if that information is removed from the site? Maybe we need a discussion somewhere about lists of awards for corporations and how much of this type of information is needed.
441: 87: 82: 91: 74: 432:
So what is your primary motivation here: Pushing for deletion because you were personally insulted, or because of POV issues, or both? (and speaking of that, kindly inform if
114: 289: 362:
are listed in this article, which in the opening states these are significant awards. If you were to go to a travel industry quiz night and a question related to the
285: 497: 177:, where it was first added as part of the "service quality" section to demonstrate its reputation in the industry and to the travelling public.-- 370:. Expanding the article to try and put some context in it is pointless, as any information which could be included in the article should, or 281: 531: 503: 493: 480: 458: 424: 403: 386: 326: 313: 296: 268: 251: 233: 218: 181: 165: 149: 128: 56: 354:, SQ does have a sizeable fanboy following. I posted on the main article talk page the fact that two awards which are mentioned , namely 17: 78: 214: 70: 62: 546: 36: 527: 495: 437: 420:
article, and provide the link to the SIA website as a reference point. To keep would be setting a bad precedent. --
379: 367: 196: 545:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
516:
is already too long to be merged back in. This article could do with a cleanup of references and so forth. --
202: 521: 162: 280:
is recognized as top in its field, its list of awards is itself notable. Similar articles include
513: 417: 375: 277: 210: 192: 174: 158: 142: 122: 49: 517: 351: 121:
Awards which a company receives are not notable. A summary awards should be incorporated into
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
265: 138: 347: 446: 489: 421: 383: 310: 260: 206: 146: 125: 53: 500: 477: 455: 400: 323: 305: 230: 178: 499:
in the past few hours, all based on nothing but self-perceived "non-notability".--
108: 293: 397:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Singapore Airlines Cargo destinations‎
246: 450: 259:. The main article already has too much information. I might agree with 343: 195:
article with a summarisation of awards, and a link provided to their
539:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
191:
This article should really be incorporated in the main
104: 100: 96: 436:
is not a result of cluelessness of the existance of
290:
Template:Lists of US Presidents and Vice Presidents
39:). No further edits should be made to this page. 48:. If you have any questions, please contact me at 492:has nominated another three SIA-related articles 549:). No further edits should be made to this page. 276:as part of series covering a major topic. As 8: 286:List of awards and achievements for Madonna 145:summarizing awards should be sufficient. -- 382:(from which came all the info anyway)? -- 245:The above logic by Huaiwei is correct. 71:Singapore Airlines awards and accolades 63:Singapore Airlines awards and accolades 364:Scottish Passenger Agents Association 356:Scottish Passenger Agents Association 282:Career achievements of Michael Jordan 18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion 7: 199:for a full rundown of their awards. 173:. This article was split off from 24: 342:of articles, they come across as 304:We should follow the comments by 1: 157:per above and copy the EL to 566: 532:11:34, 29 April 2007 (UTC) 504:07:37, 29 April 2007 (UTC) 481:17:03, 27 April 2007 (UTC) 459:06:07, 29 April 2007 (UTC) 425:02:21, 29 April 2007 (UTC) 404:06:59, 28 April 2007 (UTC) 387:06:48, 27 April 2007 (UTC) 327:06:23, 27 April 2007 (UTC) 314:06:10, 27 April 2007 (UTC) 297:02:01, 27 April 2007 (UTC) 269:00:43, 27 April 2007 (UTC) 252:23:39, 26 April 2007 (UTC) 234:22:51, 25 April 2007 (UTC) 219:18:46, 25 April 2007 (UTC) 182:17:15, 25 April 2007 (UTC) 166:14:41, 23 April 2007 (UTC) 150:13:45, 23 April 2007 (UTC) 129:10:06, 23 April 2007 (UTC) 57:13:46, 29 April 2007 (UTC) 542:Please do not modify it. 32:Please do not modify it. 374:already, be covered at 334:Having a look at the 205:comment was added by 438:all similar articles 411:And to call people 338:Singapore Airlines 376:Singapore Airlines 278:Singapore Airlines 175:Singapore Airlines 159:Singapore Airlines 143:Singapore Airlines 123:Singapore Airlines 526: 512:per Huaiwei, the 360:Korea Herald, The 352:Malaysia Airlines 222: 557: 544: 524: 413:"clueless users" 249: 200: 112: 94: 34: 565: 564: 560: 559: 558: 556: 555: 554: 553: 547:deletion review 540: 440:, as well as a 434:this nomination 247: 201:—The preceding 141:. A section in 85: 69: 66: 44:The result was 37:deletion review 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 563: 561: 552: 551: 535: 534: 484: 483: 471: 470: 469: 468: 467: 466: 465: 464: 463: 462: 461: 348:Cathay Pacific 322:"directory".-- 299: 271: 254: 239: 238: 237: 236: 185: 184: 168: 152: 119: 118: 65: 60: 42: 41: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 562: 550: 548: 543: 537: 536: 533: 529: 523: 519: 515: 511: 508: 507: 506: 505: 502: 498: 496: 494: 491: 488: 482: 479: 475: 472: 460: 457: 452: 448: 443: 439: 435: 431: 428: 427: 426: 423: 419: 414: 410: 407: 406: 405: 402: 398: 393: 390: 389: 388: 385: 381: 377: 373: 369: 365: 361: 357: 353: 349: 346:. Along with 345: 341: 337: 333: 330: 329: 328: 325: 320: 317: 316: 315: 312: 307: 303: 300: 298: 295: 291: 287: 283: 279: 275: 272: 270: 267: 262: 258: 255: 253: 250: 244: 241: 240: 235: 232: 227: 224: 223: 220: 216: 212: 208: 204: 198: 194: 190: 187: 186: 183: 180: 176: 172: 169: 167: 164: 160: 156: 153: 151: 148: 144: 140: 136: 133: 132: 131: 130: 127: 124: 116: 110: 106: 102: 98: 93: 89: 84: 80: 76: 72: 68: 67: 64: 61: 59: 58: 55: 51: 47: 40: 38: 33: 27: 26: 19: 541: 538: 514:main article 509: 486: 485: 473: 442:previous AFD 429: 412: 408: 391: 371: 363: 359: 355: 339: 335: 331: 318: 301: 273: 256: 242: 229:existance.-- 225: 188: 170: 154: 139:WP:NOT#IINFO 134: 120: 50:my talk page 45: 43: 31: 28: 510:Strong Keep 302:Strong Keep 266:Vegaswikian 243:Strong Keep 163:YechielMan 344:fanboyish 137:per nom; 54:Ian Manka 528:contribs 490:Russavia 451:Aeroflot 422:Russavia 384:Russavia 261:Russavia 215:contribs 207:Russavia 203:unsigned 147:Muchness 126:Russavia 115:View log 501:Huaiwei 487:Comment 478:Terence 456:Huaiwei 430:Comment 409:Comment 401:Huaiwei 392:Comment 332:Comment 324:Huaiwei 319:Comment 306:Huaiwei 231:Huaiwei 226:Comment 197:website 189:Comment 179:Huaiwei 88:protect 83:history 340:series 336:entire 155:Delete 135:Delete 92:delete 518:Arnzy 372:would 294:Vsion 109:views 101:watch 97:links 16:< 522:talk 474:Keep 447:WP:V 380:link 368:link 358:and 350:and 292:. -- 274:Keep 257:Keep 248:VK35 211:talk 171:Keep 105:logs 79:talk 75:edit 46:keep 418:SIA 311:Tom 113:– ( 530:) 284:, 217:) 213:• 193:SQ 161:. 107:| 103:| 99:| 95:| 90:| 86:| 81:| 77:| 52:. 525:• 520:( 221:. 209:( 117:) 111:) 73:(

Index

Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
deletion review
my talk page
Ian Manka
13:46, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Singapore Airlines awards and accolades
Singapore Airlines awards and accolades
edit
talk
history
protect
delete
links
watch
logs
views
View log
Singapore Airlines
Russavia
10:06, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
WP:NOT#IINFO
Singapore Airlines
Muchness
13:45, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Singapore Airlines
YechielMan
14:41, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Singapore Airlines
Huaiwei
17:15, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.