Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hornet (car)


 * 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. Consensus is that this car fails to meet notability standards. The source produced by the keep !voter is a directory mention and does not constitute WP:SIGCOV. Just Chilling (talk) 13:18, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Hornet (car)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unreferenced and promotional Rathfelder (talk) 20:38, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Can't find anything on Google either. Clearly not notable. William2001(talk) 21:09, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:15, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:15, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:16, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

This article is not pronominal the car has not been in production for a number of years now. In the UK there is a large following for Kit Cars and historic information on older kits needs to be maintained for future reference. If it is deleted from Wikipedia where will this information be obtainable from? Surely the main point of Wikipedia is it is an encyclopedia of information and I feel it should include information that otherwise isn't available. I recently carried out some research on Kit Cars from the 60s and it was quite difficult to obtain reference material and photographs of the cars. I agree that the Hornet Kit Car Wikipedia entry is short but at least it is available. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Turbojo (talk • contribs) 11:59, 7 July 2019 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete because the subject is not notable itself and also fails GNG.Forest90 (talk) 11:04, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep Looks like this is mentioned in at least one reiable source: https://archive.org/stream/katalog2005.compressed/katalog2005.compressed_djvu.txt Bjornredtail (talk) 07:42, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   12:45, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete That one source referred above may have accurate information, but it is essentially a product catalogue and we are an encyclopedia. I may change vote if there is some news-pieces on this car. To suggest that some fans may need this information is not wrong, but is essentially suggesting fan-cruft to be included, I see no reason why we should treat this any differently than a non-notable manga character etc.Viztor (talk) 22:35, 16 July 2019 (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.