Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Liquid Air

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 no consensus. Kurykh (talk) 04:40, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Liquid Air (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Four year old stub with no sources, possible hoax Tolstoyan at Heart (talk) 01:37, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: A quick google search turns up multiple resources that at least verify the existence of the company behind it and that they made a lot of ado about that car, so it's not a hoax article. (The car itself, on the other hand...) Sources I found includes some trivial mentions and I haven't the foggiest regarding what are or aren't reliable sources on the subject, just leaving them here for folks who do know about the subject and Wikipedia's guidelines on automobiles to check:

• http://www.virtualsteamcarmuseum.org/makers/liquid_air_power_and_automobile_co.html, including a picture of a letter by the company behind the automobile.

• Also states there's a mention in Georgano, G. N., Encyclopedia of American Automobiles, (New York, E. P. Dutton & Co., 1968), p. 119. If anyone has that encyclopedia, they might be able to verify.

• http://www.douglas-self.com/MUSEUM/POWER/liquidair/liquidair.htm#knu
• http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/green-motoring/10087205/Liquid-Air-the-future-of-motoring.html has a short mention.
• https://books.google.nl/books?id=9nT3CgAAQBAJ&dq has some info as well. No clue as to the reliability of the source, however.
• http://www.earlyamericanautomobiles.com/massautos.htm
• US 652384 A & US 633426 A are patents granted to Knudsen/Liquid Air Power And Automobile Company, proving again that the company did exist.
• http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9E04E1DB153CE433A2575AC1A96F9C94689ED7CF&legacy=true - a 1899 (not a typo) New York Times article, though I can see only the abstract
• https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=945&dat=19020506&id=cWMLAAAAIBAJ&sjid=7VIDAAAAIBAJ&pg=2460,2751086&hl=en - 1902 newspaper scan.

There's a fair bit more that can be found with some digging. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 05:12, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I also have an encyclopedia of automobiles which ought to have an entry; I'll check when I get home. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 15:53, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Not a hoax, just needs effort. Better a valid stub than an article with misplaced or missued sources. Simply put an expert needed tag, paste the above source list into a Talk section for the article, and give it time. Key thing, the knee-jerk response of my fellow Tolstoyan—we can be harsh, can't we—was clarified by the work of AddWittyNameHere, and there is clear basis for the article as a real, useful, if niche entry in the history of the business and technology. Cheers, Leprof_7272. Le Prof 73.210.155.96 (talk) 23:34, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Delete  I am citing WP:DEL7 here.  Yes, lots of Google books snippets, but what do they say?  I couldn't find anything to support the claim that this was a "joint American/English concern".  Yes, there are addresses in both London and Boston, but that is not the same thing.  With such a shaky foundation, I think the only path forward is a 100% rewrite, so that we know that every concept is verifiable and not WP:SYNTH.  The technology was to take a steam-powered automobile and replace the steam with liquid compressed air.  A 1953 book questions that this was ever anything more than an idea that sold stock.  Certainly notable given the coverage then and over time, but I didn't see any mention of there being a sample in a museum.  Unscintillating (talk) 18:23, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

After reading some of the sources found by AddWittyNameHere, I decided to make a bold edit to the existing page to remove the idea that there was ever production or a production factory, as well as eliminate the vague words "joint American/English concern".  Unscintillating (talk) 23:12, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as a clear business listing of which our policies are clear is never the case for articles, the sources are simple announcements, not substance, so there's no convincing basis. SwisterTwister talk 21:35, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Note  This XfD has been closed and reopened, see edit history for details.  Temporary full page protection has been requested.  Unscintillating (talk) 23:44, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete -- the sources provided do not establish notability. I also note that Liquid Air Power and Automobile Co. article does not exist. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:32, 27 February 2017 (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.