Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Apple electric car project (4th nomination)


 * 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. A clear consensus to keep after relisting. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:43, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Apple electric car project
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

That this article is about a rumored Product that meets the criteria in WP:SPECULATION paragraph 5 for deletion. There is no data available from Apple Inc. that such a Product is being OR will be created Loomdime (talk) 06:38, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: Articles for deletion/Apple iCar was the 3rd AFD on this subject. That title now redirects to this article. -- &#124;  Uncle Milty  &#124;  talk  &#124;  19:37, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:37, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:37, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:37, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:37, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep—multiple sources have reported on this project. The fact that Apple hasn't confirmed or denied its existence is immaterial. This article passes WP:GNG and doesn't warrent deletion.  Imzadi 1979  →  23:22, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Please keep. This is a notable rumor which has been talked about by many news organizations, and, even if Apple never would say something such as "The project is currently undergoing development.", it would still be a notable subject. Take Half-Life 3 for instance; the probably most infamous example of vaporware is a popular rumor (and a confirmed project). Now, if Titan were only speculated by quite a few sources, then, it might not be a notable subject after all. Gamingforfun 3 6 5 ( talk ) 07:30, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 09:43, 30 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep – Passes WP:N upon a source review (e.g. USA Today, Newsweek, Time, The Wall Street Journal, more:, , , , ) and is not a violation of WP:CRYSTAL because it anticipated, verifiable and is of sufficiently wide interest to merit an article. North America1000 09:45, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep - Notable, well-sourced article. Not really a speculation at this point. You don't really need a product listed on manufacturer website to pass the check. SkywalkerPL (talk) 17:36, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep - In fact being listed on Apple's website would not be a good way to establish notability as that would be a primary source. Additionally given the wide reliable coverage as cited by above this one deserves to stay. Mwenzangu (talk) 02:10, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep per sources above, It may be a good idea to stop with the AFDs as it's not going to be deleted. – Davey 2010 Talk 22:05, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep per Northamerica1000, although the article could be rewritten to avoid violating WP:CRYSTAL.--Proud User (talk) 16:28, 2 April 2016 (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.