Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/KZD-85

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 keep. postdlf (talk) 18:48, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

KZD-85

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

Unsourced, badly written affair that seems to fail WP:GNG The Banner talk 10:41, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sources are given here:

As only total 60 of this KZD drohnes where ever build and the swiss air force is the only operator of (now 30) of them it is not so easy to find informations about it. But it is still in use since nearly 30 years and will be used by the swiss air force for the next 5 years, it is an importent factor. So Keep it. FFA P-16 (talk) 11:41, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What we need are independent, reliable, prior published sources. The two you give here fail both on that point as the first one is from the Swiss Air Force itself and the second is a forum. The Banner talk 12:58, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The swiss air force home page is the best one, first hand informations.. and don't say this is promo.. this could you may say if the information would be from the homepage of the Farner Werke who build it, but not of the swiss air force page, the swiss air force don't try to sell it. I had writen this page i have given this two refrences, this 2 are enough also in the german wikipedia. FFA P-16 (talk) 16:42, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. Rcsprinter¹²³ (intone) @ 18:21, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Switzerland-related deletion discussions. Rcsprinter₁₂₃ (interact) @ 18:22, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The author of this article is a Swiss Air force enthusiast whose Wikipedia competence not always matches their enthusiasm. However, a cursory Google Books search shows that this UAV has been covered as much as one would expect a 1980s weapons system to be covered in military publications, including Jane's All the World's Aircraft, p. 418, and World unmanned aircraft, p. 73. Sandstein 20:07, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Possible, possible. But a copy of your text as external links is of course not a source. The Banner talk 17:40, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Sandstein, i add the informations you brought up here into the article. FFA P-16 (talk) 16:44, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well a printet source is well enough It don't has to be a online source. But here we have the link who shows that the printet one realy exist. And Jane's All the World's Aircraft is well known as reliable. So we have this Book and the Swiss Air Force Homepage.FFA P-16 (talk) 18:14, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:24, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 06:16, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Sandstein has established the notability of the topic. Kudos to User:FFA P-16 for getting the page started. Andrew D. (talk) 13:20, 1 February 2015 (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.