Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2 mm scale


 * 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.  JGHowes   talk  16:15, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

2 mm scale

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Does not pass WP:GNG and article is full of WP:OR. Sure, there is evidence that some models were made in this size, but no reliable sources discuss the significance of this particular size model train. Rusf10 (talk) 00:12, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Rusf10 (talk) 00:12, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Rusf10 (talk) 00:12, 6 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Oppose: I believe this article should be kept for two reasons. 1 You have no proof that some of the articles content is OR 2 Maybe try looking around for more sources. Just because an article is lacking a few sources that doesn’t mean the entire thing should be nuked. Instead if some of the content is found to be OR then surely the text could be rewritten and cited to a source. Slender (talk) 16:21, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 1. I don't have to prove anything. WP:ONUS is on the person who added the content. 2. I already did a search and only came up with a few brief mentions, no in-depth coverage. 3. Do you have a policy-based reason to keep?--Rusf10 (talk) 17:37, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * comment My impression is that almost nobody uses this name: they either call it "FS160" or "fiNescale". And I don't get a lot of hits for either of those, but at least I get something. Given the length of any of these precision modelling groups, though, it's not unreasonable to merge each of them into its corresponding hobbyist gauge. Mangoe (talk) 18:31, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * comment Would anything from here be accepted to be added as a source? Surely for this site to exist means that it is a popular scale in the UK at least. http://www.2mm.org.uk/ Slender (talk) 19:11, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * keep Look at the results of a Google Books search for "'2mm scale' railway -wikipedia" -- mentioned all over the place. They don't say much about it simply because there isn't much to say: "2mm scale" says it all; a scale of 2mm/ft, implied finescale (use of a "Xmm scale" format rather than "N" or other named scale.  It's a British thing, so unsurprisingly few mentions outside of British hobby press. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 08:58, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
 * So if there isn't much to say, why is this deserving of its own article?--Rusf10 (talk) 14:28, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
 * keep While it is less popular than N scale, I have seen plenty of examples of 2mm scale modelling at exhibitions around the UK; it is the little brother of Protofour. I can see that some editors have added new citations but a few more will still be helpful. Geof Sheppard (talk) 16:26, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
 * keep: We are refactored and cited well past the nom. at 1021666328 and required notability is established. There remains some uncited stuff but most will be citable if I or elseone leverages 9780951837313 or a derivation. Djm-leighpark (talk) 19:54, 11 May 2021 (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.