Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of electric vehicle battery manufacturers


 * 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. Elonka 16:48, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

List of electric vehicle battery manufacturers

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This list of companies does not indicate the notability of the companies and uses no RS sources. This is essentially one big wp:ELNO #14 violation. NJGW (talk) 15:01, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Most of the companies listed are notable in the sense of having Wikipedia articles, the standard for such lists. (And most of those are specific companies, making this product only or primarily). DGG (talk) 15:54, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
 * comment just because some of them have articles does not guarantee that they are notable companies... many of those were created or mostly edited by, who is the main contributor to this list. Also, would you suggest deleting all those with no article and removing the non-rs refs?  NJGW (talk) 16:04, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - The purpose of lists is Information, Navigation & Development, not to specifically point out WP:N of items on the list. At this point, more than %75 of the wikilinks are blue, so it seems to me to be doing a good job so far. In my mind, the EL you are refering to are the Citations for the provided information. Exit2DOS2000   •T•C•  02:30, 28 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. This, as any other articles taged for deletion by NJGW are important ones. --Mac (talk) 12:19, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. At the very most should be a table within Electric vehicle battery, or a category. Also, VERY shaky on sources. Example: the list claims JCS supplies electric batteries to Ford, Chrysler and GM in the United States Advanced Battery Consortium (USABC). But if you read the citation it only says that the USABC (whose members include Ford, Chrysler and GM) have granted a funding contract to JCS which "will focus on the development of lithium-ion battery systems for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) and over the course of two years will seek to validate the commercial feasibility of lithium-ion technology for mass market PHEVs". That is MUCH less than what the article claims. Another example: Axeon and Porsche, for a car which does not (yet) exist, and the citation doesnt say if the car will just be a one-off or mass-produced. Another problem: References 1,4,5,7,9,11,19 & 22 are just external links to manufacturer websites, not real citations. Padding, as per the nominee's rationale of WP:ELNO #14? All this looks like is a list of companies which build a product and a list of their customers. How is that encyclopedic? Chryslerforever1988 (talk) 20:38, 30 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep.  Lots of blue links, and those articles have sources (though most of them need to have their references checked, and more added).  NJGW: most of the articles weren't in fact created by Mac (though he's edited most of them) and even if they had been, that's not the point - let's talk about the article, not the editor.  It's a list that's of interest to a very small number of people, granted, but why not leave it here for that small group?  Wikipedia is not paper.  I did wonder whether it should be converted to a category, but that argument could be made for any list.  --Hugh Charles Parker (talk - contribs) 15:29, 31 October 2008 (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.