Deletion of Aid station

Comment: but rewrite. Nom is absolutely right - current article is nothing but a DICDEF. But I think this could be expanded with better examples (military, marathon, cycling, music festivals, etc.) and better sources. http://books.google.com.au/books?id=ju_U9e7j4_EC&dq This book, for example, details their function and history with regard to the Chicago Marathon in particular. So my argument is more for keeping the title rather than this "article".  is relevant, I think
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Blow it up and start over (WP:TNT)

Comment: although the article needs a significant amount of work, AfD is |not a substitute for article improvements. The subject has received |significant coverage in https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Aid+Station%22&aq=f&oq=%22Aid+Station%22&aqs=chrome.0.57j65l3j0l2.7509j0&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#q=%22Aid+Station%22&safe=off&source=lnms&tbm=bks&sa=X&ei=aAZ3UdTpIofsiQKC74GgBA&ved=0CA8Q_AUoAg&bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&bvm=bv.45580626,d.cGE&fp=e56cdf4a98475528&biw=966&bih=835 multiple |reliable sources. Therefore the subject meets  and deletion is not advised. Now unless there is a good  argument, I will mozy on
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:NOTCLEANUP||WP:SIGCOV||WP:RS||WP:GNG||WP:TNT)