Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Low-energy vehicle


 * 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. Lankiveil (speak to me) 09:27, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Low-energy vehicle

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

De-proded article which needs broader discussion. Although one could say that the term is not exactly neologism, it is still used mainly by different social media (including mirrors of Wikipedia) and some car manufacturers as a promoting term for hybrid cars. The definition provided by the article is not supported by reliable sources and the article seems to be largely unsourced original research and coatrack. No reference used in this article use this term. The reasoning for PROD by anon user was:

this article has no references calling this thing a "low energy vehicle", and is written more like a buying guide than an article, and appears to contravene WP:OR and WP:COATRACK being more about vehicle efficiency than low energy; according to the talk page, this has been a problematic WP:SOAPBOXy article since 2008

The term seems to be also a synonym for fuel-efficient car. The relevant article in Wikipedia links to Fuel efficiency.

There is a proposal to merge this article to Motorised_quadricycle. It may be relevant regarding some minor part of this article but in general due to OR issues it would be better to delete it. Beagel (talk) 16:48, 10 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete It is a coatrack for one man's opinions on transport. It is an unsalvageable mess of OR and NPOV. I don't think we ever found a decent RS for the term LEV, which is not surprising since it is so ambiguous. Greglocock (talk) 20:22, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. — Mike  moral  ♪♫  20:24, 10 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete as per Greglocock. The term seems to be purely a personal concoction and the ideas expressed better fit within articles dealing with fuel-efficient car and Green vehicle. NealeFamily (talk) 00:28, 11 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete filled with OR with no RS or any other sort of references using the term LEV, and has been problematic since 2008. -- 70.24.244.161 (talk) 12:09, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Redirect somewhere, possibly after deletion. It's as of the time of this edit redirected to Fuel economy in automobiles. 6 an 6 sh 6 20:49, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment I see no purpose in a redirect since one of the main stumbling blocks with the article is that the phrase LEV can only be found in this article and its mirrors. Why perpetuate a neologism used only on wiki? Greglocock (talk) 22:37, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Maybe in reliable sources, but a google search comes up with plenty of hits, meaning it's a potential search term. 6 an 6 sh 6 01:06, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
 * "low energy vehicle" is inherently POV. There's usage for low production energy, the energy needed to build the vehicle in the first place, which has nothing to do with what's found on the article right now. And an electric golf cart uses low energy, as does a moped, so what qualifies as a low energy vehicle is too subjective without actual quality usage, with the diversity of uses, at most if this exists, it would be a disambiguation page, redirection just leaves out one usage or another. -- 70.24.244.161 (talk) 04:39, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
 * If so, then maybe create a dab for it. Nothing's off the table at this point, really, except keeping it. 6 an 6 sh 6 04:57, 12 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment/redirect - This article was preemptively redirected. Merging doesn't require an afd discussion, if not done during an afd. I can import this to Wikiversity if anyone wants to continue it there with original research. - Sidelight 12 Talk 04:23, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment: I've undone the redirecting, as the AfD is still open. While an AfD is open redirecting = blanking and is out of process. - The Bushranger One ping only 03:53, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nom, merging any unique and useful content into such articles as fuel efficiency, hybrid vehicle, etc. As it stands, this feels like a good effort at an encyclopaedic topic, but too much of a neologism when there are plenty of other articles on topic. – Kieran T  (' talk ') 13:53, 13 February 2014 (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.