Deletion of Alaska Seaplane Service (3rd nomination)

Comment: The topic appears in numerous books about Alaska and so has adequate notability for our purposes.  The nomination is openly disruptive per  as it is clear that the only reason for making the nomination is the hope of getting a different result.  Please see  and 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:DEL||WP:WIN||WP:LETITGO)

Comment: per . It's not surprising there's so little material on an airline which has two planes
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: I closed the first AFD in 2008 as "keep" but this time I have to agree with the nom. The only coverage I can find is trivial mentions, directory entries and such. I might be convinced to keep this under  if they were the only game in town but air services are a dime a dozen up there
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Ignore all rules (WP:IAR)

Comment: The following is the sum total of WP guidelines dealing specifically with airline notability: "Commercial airlines can be notable if they have been discussed in multiple, reliable sources". This airline has been mentioned in the ''Flight International'' World Airline Directory since 2004 and in the ''Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung''. Notwithstanding , it seems Alaska Seaplane Service has more mention in "independent, third-party, reliable sources" than many other aviation companies with articles, some of which I have tried (and failed) to have deleted via either CSD or PROD. Regardless of how this discussion turns out, perhaps it is time to iron out what actually constitutes a notable airline
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:OTHERSTUFF)