Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yamaha FZ700

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
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 delete. Most "keep" !votes focus on "consensus of notability of individual models", but no such consensus is found/shown. On the contrary, AFD jurisprudence shows no such consensus. Without *significant* external coverage, this model appears to fail GNG on its own the panda ₯’ 10:21, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yamaha FZ700

Yamaha FZ700 (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)

Fails WP:PRODUCT. There is no independent evidence this is notable. This is is a prime example of violating the principle, "Avoid creating multiple stubs about each individual product (PU-36 Explosive Space Modulator, Q-36 Explosive Space Modulator, R-36 Explosive Space Modulator, etc.) especially if there is no realistic hope of expansion." Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:56, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:42, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:42, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Note that the nominator converted the page to a redirect without warning, redirecting it to the Yamaha FZ750 page with the comment that "", but the other page doesn't (and never did) cover this unique model. The editor made no effort to merge the content or the sources to the new article. Nothing passes or fails WP:PRODUCT as the guideline provides no litmus for notability, but this nomination is a prime example of failing to remember that deletion is a last resport. There's plenty of hope for expansion as references are available. (I've added two in the last week, with four in the article total now.) -- Mikeblas (talk) 03:38, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Does this subject meet the WP:GNG? WP:PRODUCT is a specific section of the specific Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) guideline. Has the FZ700 ever been the subject (not just mentioned in passing) of coverage in independent reliable sources? I found zero coverage, and only passing mention in an article about the FZ750. The important point about WP:PRODUCT is that we don't automatically create an article about every single model of bike ever made. Or "No subject is automatically or inherently notable merely because it exists" as Wikipedia:Notability says.

To clarify, the 3 links currently in the article are an unreliable scraper site [1], a dead link[2] (to an old scaper site) and a personal blog post[3]. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 04:02, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep. Per long-standing WP:CONSENSUS, individual models of motor vehicles are notable provided they meet WP:V. - The Bushranger One ping only 21:28, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Can you cite which consensus you're referring to here? I'm aware of a common misconception that every model gets an article, but Wikipedia:WikiProject Automobiles/Conventions says no such thing; on the contrary it suggests merging stubs of related models might be a good idea. WP:MC-MOS specifically addresses the misconception, and points out that the guideline WP:NRVE in Wikipedia:Notability overrides any claim to automatic notability: "No subject is automatically or inherently notable merely because it exists." If we did presume every individual model was notable, we'd be left with thousands more motorcycle permastubs than we already have.

      Not to mention the stylistic gains from upmerging related models to form a more coherent narrative. But if there is a consensus on this when we need to change the motorcycling and automobile guidelines to say so. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 22:25, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar ♔ 12:39, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
These are all the examples I can find. Please show me where any consensus was reached saying we have to make an article for every model of car or bike. I won't lose sleep over keeping this article on its merits, but this idea that WP:NRVE doesn't apply to models is a disturbing precedent, and requires broader consensus at WikiProject Motorcycling and WikiProject Automobiles, and WikiProject Notability for that matter. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 19:05, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - motorcycle models are not inherently notable, as Dennis has poitned out so well. The Times article is the only reliable source. Bearian (talk) 20:25, 28 May 2014 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Yamaha_FZ700&oldid=1138713906"