== Note: 1 & 2 Copied from Talk:Airbus G-EUPC == 

 ==1. Comments== 
 New page created, feel free to add or edit.   
 :wHILST I would dearly love to see this page blossom, I cannot seem to be able to justify it. I feel that the subject should have no more mention than a parqagraph in an article on the 2012 Games as a whole. Having said that I amhoping that I spark a discussion that will enable the coorect path to be chosen. P.S. my ex-wife is going to be one of the torch-bearers!!   
 ::Actually I kinda agree. Let's leave here for a few days and then see what LOCOG use the plane for next! If it disappears back into the BA schedules perhaps I should move the whole page to WikiNews??   
 :::On further reflection I have moved most of the non-aviation material to a new section of 2012 Summer Olympics torch relay.   

 == 2. Deletion request == 

  wrote concern = Not notable outside of the 2012 Summer Olympics torch relay, failing WP:GNG and WP:ONEEVENT.  Any useful information can be merged there (which most of it is already).  No real need for a redirect as it is an unlikely search term. 
 :However she/he did not put any discussion on this page to discuss this deletion first.   reveals s/he has a tendency to delete articles without a full discussion on appropriate pages and wikiprojects eg Wikipedia:AVIA. Her/his reasons for deletion may be valid but please let's have an informed discussion first.   
 ::Wikipedia has several modern aircraft used for specific purposes, eg VC-137C SAM 26000 in the USA. These specially painted Airbus aircraft will have several purposes during the Summer Olympics, not just the arrival of the Olympic Torch. Can we wait a bit before Speedy Deletion? Perhaps widen scope of article to include all 9 Airbus aircraft with livery designed by Pascal Anson.   
 :::Lidos, as I (just) mentioned on your talk page, the WP:PROD process does not require discussion (and is completely different from the Speed Deletion process.  There was nothing wrong my actions, nor was any offensive intended towards you nor an attempt to circumvent any discussion.  lease review what PROD means before making further allegations.  If you think an article deserves a deletion discussion (aka an WP:AFD process), whether or not you believe the article should (or would/will) be deleted it is perfectly acceptable to remove the PROD tag without comment (though preferably a reason should be given.). Finally, I do not agree that the article (even if expanded in scope) will ever meet WP:GNG and intend to bring the article to WP:AFD.