The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was Keep. The nominator has failed to advance a policy-based reason for deletion and they are the only editor in the discussion who advocates anything other than keeping.
Thryduulf (
talk)
08:32, 1 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Keep per WP:BEFORE, problems that can be solved through normal editing shouldn't be sent here; fancruft is solvable through normal editing, hence is not a reason for deletion. The chances of there being no sources in existence for an American railway locomotive is tiny, and so, as the encyclopedia isn't finished, this should be kept and tagged as relevant. ~~ Alex Noble/
1-2/
TRB10:58, 22 March 2020 (UTC)reply
I felt
WP:PRODUCT as it pertains to "Avoid creating multiple stubs about each individual product (PU-36 Explosive Space Modulator, Q-36 Explosive Space Modulator, R-36 Explosive Space Modulator, etc.)" would be applicable here.
Graywalls (
talk)
17:46, 24 March 2020 (UTC)reply
I've never heard of WP:PRODUCT being applied to vehicles (airplanes, cars, locomotives). It would make little sense to merge this article into GE Transportation Systems (or wherever), and there's plenty of scope for expansion.
Mackensen(talk)22:38, 25 March 2020 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was Keep. The nominator has failed to advance a policy-based reason for deletion and they are the only editor in the discussion who advocates anything other than keeping.
Thryduulf (
talk)
08:32, 1 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Keep per WP:BEFORE, problems that can be solved through normal editing shouldn't be sent here; fancruft is solvable through normal editing, hence is not a reason for deletion. The chances of there being no sources in existence for an American railway locomotive is tiny, and so, as the encyclopedia isn't finished, this should be kept and tagged as relevant. ~~ Alex Noble/
1-2/
TRB10:58, 22 March 2020 (UTC)reply
I felt
WP:PRODUCT as it pertains to "Avoid creating multiple stubs about each individual product (PU-36 Explosive Space Modulator, Q-36 Explosive Space Modulator, R-36 Explosive Space Modulator, etc.)" would be applicable here.
Graywalls (
talk)
17:46, 24 March 2020 (UTC)reply
I've never heard of WP:PRODUCT being applied to vehicles (airplanes, cars, locomotives). It would make little sense to merge this article into GE Transportation Systems (or wherever), and there's plenty of scope for expansion.
Mackensen(talk)22:38, 25 March 2020 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.