Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bus & Coach of the Year


 * 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. (non-admin closure) Sam Sailor Talk! 11:12, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Bus & Coach of the Year

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Subject is an obscure award, with virtually no independant mainstream RS coverage. Cited sources are almost entirely affiliated with the industry/award and fail WP:RS. Subject ultimately fails GNG. See also this related discussion. Ad Orientem (talk) 14:37, 5 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. Car of the year is less than half as long, so if one considers the number of buses vs the number of cars in the world, then one must grant that this article is significant. Useddenim (talk) 20:31, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Article length is not a criteria in WP:GNG. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:35, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.  Rcsprinter123     (rhapsodise)  22:07, 5 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment: As the one who created the article (from translation) I will only comment, since I'm just fed up and don't want to waste any energy on this. But I will give my views on why I created it in the first place. It is quite obvious to me that it will never have any in-depth coverage outside the press specifically covering the bus and coach industry. If I'd had any idea that in-depth press coverage in general media would be a requirement for notability, I would obviously not have wasted time translating it. Here is my view on how the award works:
 * A jury of independent bus and coach journalists representing a publication in their respective country do a series of real-life tests and professional assessments on buses and coaches that have been enrolled by the manufacturers.
 * Each jury member gives a number of points to each participant based on their judgement. Then the points from each of the jury members are added up and if more than one contestant get the same score, the jury will together jugde who was the better.
 * The jury announces the winner, which is given the rights to use the title Bus of the Year or Coach of the Year in their marketing.
 * How the manufacturers choose to use this in their marketing varies a lot between the manufacturers and also between the local distributors. How the industry-related press covers it is also very different, and probably quite inconsistent. On the Bus of the Year winners there is not much visible marketing except from press/publicity and on demonstrator vehicles. On Coach of the Year winners it is quite common that there will be a large "Coach of the Year 20xx" sticker on the rear window on quite a lot of vehicles delivered to customers.
 * It puzzles me a bit that none of the other articles in the Commercial vehicle awards category are up for deletion, so I want to compare against them. This award is in every way quite equal to both the International Truck of the Year and International Van of the Year. They all claim to be "international", but are limited to the European market. They also have about the same status in their respective industry and among "fans", or possibly the bus/coach award has an even higher status. The truck industry is somewhat larger than the bus/coach industry, but not that different to make a difference in notability, and I can't really say I've seen any non-industry coverage of the truck award up trough the years either. The van award is somewhat different, since vans are not entirely limited to commercial vehicles, and thus has a broader appeal. And then there are those Japanese Blue Ribbon Award (railway) and Laurel Prize. From their descriptions they appear to be entirely fan-based, non-professional awards, and the Blue Ribbon Award seem to have the characteristics of a beauty contest for trains. Also these are limited to one country only, in contrast to all other mentioned awards. Those awards are in my view extremely obscure, so I am just a bit baffled that their notability is not questioned.
 * I made this article for busfans (like me) to read, at a time when I had the impression that this was a good enough reason for such an article to exist. Any commercial or publicity-related aspect of its presence was not considered at all. I have since then learned that things that may only be of interest to busfans are considered too obscure for English Wikipedia, which is also why I out of lack of motivation have more or less stopped contributing any new here, in fear of the effort being a waste. This is also why I will not vote on this AfD. Bergenga (talk) 18:02, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Sailor Talk! 17:28, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep The award appears to be taken quite seriously in the bus/coach world. (cf this), and there are references for all of the key information (some are broken, so need to be fixed). Because this award doesn't include the US, sources don't leap out at me while doing a search, and I find the transport world outside of the US to be, well, completely foreign. (Such as this.) But this article seems solid to me. LaMona (talk) 01:06, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
 * The main problem is not English vs non-English sources. The problem is the lack of in depth coverage from independent (non-affiliated) reliable sources. I haven't been able to find much of anything. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:41, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 15:33, 19 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep Nominator is incorrect in conflating "independent" and "mainstream" - Wikipedia is not meant to be an encyclopedia of the mainstream alone, it's meant to be, in theory at least, a generic encyclopedia with branches into specific topics that go as deep as is justified by independent coverage. As you would expect given what it is, this award is covered by every independent publication within the industry, i.e. all journals not involved in its judging or promotion. Expecting a bus award to be covered in the mainstream press is simply not realistic - to apply such a test, well, you might as well be declaring 99% of sector to be non-notable. While Wikipedia's treatment of this major aspect of human activity is exceptionally poor for a supposed encyclopedia with the definition I gave (and quite obviously it's because for every person here who knows the topic area enough to know what does get independent coverage and what doesn't, they are outnumbered by a hundred who think a bus is just a bus), to delete articles like this would tip it from poor to completely useless. If the nominator is struggling to find evidence of independent coverage, I suggest they ask themselves if they would even know where to look, and that unlike a lot of other sectors which get plenty of coverage in Wikipedia, because there is still a profit motive for people writing about the bus industry for a living, much of the coverage they want will be offline or behind paywalls/subscriptions. I could assist in that endeavour with my own knowledge, but I long ago gave up on the idea Wikipedia (or more accurately, Wikipedians) had any desire or capability to create high quality articles relating to buses, bus transport or the bus industry. The ones that are here are pretty poor, of no real use to anyone except those readers with no alternative - which can't be anyone inside the industry I'm sure, nor anyone with more than a passing interest in it and therefore willing to pay/buy/subscribe/research offline. I was actually pleasantly surprised to find this one even existed. Long may it stay, but I am doubtful. Jorm34 (talk) 12:55, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep and I nearly closed myself, I would suggest considering if this can be improved first; and if not, we can renominate if needed for attention. SwisterTwister   talk  06:20, 27 July 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.