Deletion of Army One

Comment: Navy One & Army One, both have received significant coverage sufficient to pass . Failing that I would urge merge & redirect to Vehicles of the President of the United States as suggested in the nomination. ''Coast Guard One'' has never existed, however, ''Coast Guard Two'' has, perhaps it is |too soon per ? Therefore ''Coast Guard One'' should be renamed Coast Guard Two or at worse merge into an article such as Vehicles of the Vice President of the United States
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:TOOSOON||WP:NOTCRYSTAL)

Comment: this AfD seems rather y. See the discussion Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Aircraft#Aircraft_of_the_President_of_the_United_States_redux|here. Also: I'm not sure how  applies, and as for "permastub", see , 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point (WP:POINT||WP:UNDUE||WP:NOEFFORT||WP:TOOLITTLE)

Comment: There's another important policy to consider here and that is .  Just because the President rode in a plane a few times doesn't mean that callsign needs its own article, anymore than we don't have articles on all the places George Washington slept at or the horses he rode
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:NOTINHERITED)

Comment: Army One and Navy One at least, as both pass GNG, Navy One in particular receiving wide-seapd coverage in media. Possibly re-create Aircraft of the President of the United States as an alternative to merging these articles to the already-cluttered Transportation of the President of the United States article (formerly Vehicles of the President of the United States. I'm not sure why we are at AFD when a Merge discision would have sufficed, and is that appearent intent of the AFD, and thus I agree with BR that this nom is y. Also, we have no guidelines against "permastubs", whatever the heck that actually means! (See , .) Please keep in mind that this user merged the three articles back in Sept 2012 without any prior discussion on those articles' talk pages, with no notification of the regular editors involved in editing those pages, nor did he notify the project or any pf the editors who participated in the post-merge discussions at Talk:Army One of this AFD
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point (WP:POINT||WP:NOEFFORT||WP:TOOLITTLE)