Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ZEV 10 LRC

:{{la|ZEV 10 LRC}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/ZEV_10_LRC Stats])

:({{Find sources|ZEV 10 LRC}})

Looks like your run of the mill wiki advertising WP:SPAM. Sources are mostly promotional puff pieces and fail WP:RS. Ad Orientem (talk) 04:10, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

• Delete It's possible there could be sufficient notability for this product in the future, but the current sources and article are not reliable. It reads like an ad, and all the citations are from the company or PR release or unrelated to the content. The only reliable/neutral source I could find on Google was: [http://www.dealernews.com/dealernews/article/zev-claims-140-mile-range-new-electric-scooter | dealernews.com], which is just an article about the product announcement. Beakermeep (talk) 05:00, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose deletion Instead the page should be moved and merged with the main article on the manufacturer, Z Electric Vehicle. I note the page was created by a newbie, and in accord with the don't bite the newbies policy WP:bite, that editor needs time to learn. In this case what needs to be learned is that not every product of a manufacturer deserves its own page. WP:Product. I would wait until that newbie editor weighs in, and responds to the WP:Product issue. Otherwise we are destroying a page which does supply citations (which could be better formatted) on the false assumption that we know better than the editors of the major trade publication for motorcycle dealers, what models are notable.ElijahBosley ^{(talk ☞)} 14:15, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
• Redirect to Z Electric Vehicle. There's not much to actually merge. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 15:32, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:28, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:28, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

• Incubate - Perhaps there is an alternative available by allowing this article to Incubate away from the article namespace. The article has a number of problems, including WP:PROMO, but assuming good faith, under WP:BITE the original author should be given a chance to improve the article, if they are willing to do so. ElijahBosley presents some valid arguments and I feel if the article could be presented from a more neutral point of view, it may be worth keeping. Dfadden (talk) 07:56, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

---

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger _{One ping only} 12:09, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

---

---

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:44, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

---

• Redirect to Z Electric Vehicle. →Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 19:00, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

:Keep. I generally oppose merging model pages into the manufacturer, as it messes up categories and infoboxes look crummy when embedded in the mfgr page. — Brianhe (talk) 20:43, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

: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.