Talk:StarFire (navigation system)

Delete Proposal due to promotional

(Copied from the User page of Maury Markowitz linked here)

I've added the "{{prod}}" template to the article StarFire (navigation system), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at Talk:StarFire (navigation system). You may remove the deletion notice, and the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached, or if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria. TheRingess 16:53, 12 December 2006 (UTC)}

In reply to User:TheRingess's proposal to delete the article due promotional material

• The system this article references is a unique system in radio-navigation and has a place in discussions regarding navigation augmentation systems.
• Its size alone would probably preclude it from being integrated back into a john deere main-article.
• After read through it again, and I'm not sure what elements triggered the promotional delete but I believe the community would address them if you care to describe what you noticed.

I've deleted the tag to give the tagger time to comment, and the community time to address the concerns. - Davandron | Talk 23:58, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Wow, come back from holiday and find this? Well first off, PROD should be used as a substitute quick-delete procedure for articles that fail to meet various notability guidelines. StarFire is the most accurate satnav system in the world. If that isn't an argument for inclusion, I can't imagine what is. But more to the point, PROD should (but rarely is) be used for removing ad-like content. Again, I really don't see how this applies. I wrote this article in the midst of writing or re-writing many/most of the radio-navigation articles, I hope I don't have to un-prod all of them too! Maury 16:31, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

In real life Starfire is far from the most accurate correction system in the world. It is probably the most inaccurate. The references are from Starfire propaganda websites.

Please state then what the most accurate is then. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.216.79.161 (talk) 00:30, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your anonymous comments. They have been filed appropriately. Maury 13:53, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Claims of accuracy ?

Hello all, I am a farmer from Australia and currently use the Starfire2 system. I think the article is very informative and helped me to understand how this system differs from other systems. This article should not be deleted! The sentance that says "This is the most accurate GPS correction system currently available, with more than enough accuracy for fully automated driving systems", should either be deleted or backed up with citations. (from independant research). I will delete this sentance within a week if there are no objections.--Yendor72 (talk) 01:13, 11 April 2008 (UTC)