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. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 04:37, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Boeing fuselage Section 41 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

This article describes...well, what Boeing calls the cockpit section of its aircraft. I PRODded this in the past, and it was removed with the comment that "the cockpit section is a critical part of any aircraft". This is true, but the fact Boeing calls it "Fuselage Section 41" is not. There is no notability to Section 41; the fact certain models share a similar/identical cockpit section can be included in the relevant model articles. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 02:45, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 02:45, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This is a historic term and well known in the Boeing aircraft community. --rogerd (talk) 04:17, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How is it "historic", and how does it being "well-known in the Boeing aicraft community" make it notable? Being used by a specialist group =/= notability. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 08:27, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete not really notable as a stand-alone article the common cockpits thing could be mentioned in the related aircraft articles. Now a well-referenced article on Section and Station numbering on Boeing products might be notable - but not just one part of what is a complex system. MilborneOne (talk) 18:14, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as Section 41 is internal company jargon and hardly noteworthy as a stand-alone article. Mariepr (talk) 01:59, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete in my opinion, it is random information - how is this block more notable than the many other blocks that don't have articles? It is undue weight to give it an article to itself, maybe a Boeing Commerical Aircraft Manufacturing article dedicated to the manufacturing process, stages, and key components of a Boeing civil aircraft might just be justifiable, and this is where this info would belong, if at all. Kyteto (talk) 01:41, 22 December 2011 (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.