Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Märklin Digital


 * 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 - Nominator has been blocked for abusing multiple accounts. (non-admin closure) Unionhawk Talk E-mail 16:40, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Märklin Digital

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

Unreferenced. Fails the general notability guideline. May qualify for CSD A7 as it does not indicate why the subject is important or significant.

I am also nominating the following articles for the same reason:



McWomble (talk) 15:57, 15 May 2009 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Locobot (talk) 01:36, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete - I tried searching for reliable sources in support of notability but could not find any. -- King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 04:04, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak keep per below. -- King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 22:04, 25 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep Märklin Digital per coverage in books such as in, . There are even books dedicated to the subject, it seems: , . Merge the others, possibly shortened, into Märklin Digital as not individually notable components of that system.  Sandstein   06:08, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not sufficient to establish notability. The threshold for notability is significant coverage in reliable sources. The articles do not even assert the importance or significance of the subjects let alone provide reliable sources to support such a claim. If there are non-self published books dedicated to the subject, then cite them. McWomble (talk) 15:39, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Coverage in the books linked to is neither trivial not incidental, as is apparent from the Google Books preview. The two books dedicated to the subject are and .   Sandstein   16:10, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. According to the Gemeinsamer Verbundkatalog entries, both those books are self-published. Thin Arthur (talk) 10:17, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Keep Märklin Digital as a notable control system. Märklin decoders could be merged there, if desired, or kept as valid sub-article. Other topics should be merged. --ThaddeusB (talk) 16:53, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Märklin Digital was one of the first digital model railway control system. Sounds notable enough to me, model trains quite big with some people. And with mention in books about the subject, I don't see why anyone would object to there being an article about it.  You can't have more than a set number of pages in any book that mentions it, since there isn't really that much to say about it.   D r e a m Focus  04:12, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. Märklin Digital was one of the first digital model railway control system. This is factually incorrect. Lionel Electronic Train Control predates Märklin Digital by 37 years. Railcommand, Zero 1, Dynatrol, EMS, Protrac and Salota all appeared around 1979-80. Märklin was a relative latecomer in 1986. The only thing notable about Märklin Digital is it was designed for Märklin's AC analogue control. As already noted the books are self-published, therefore not acceptable sources. I am not !voting here, but merely pointing out that the threshold for notability has not been established. Thin Arthur (talk) 10:17, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth , as per WP:V. Considering 1986 was before the advent of the world wide web and that sources from that time period I recon will be mostly European-based, and more specifically German, their claim is valid in context. We're reading this with 100% hindsight and search engines. MLauba (talk) 18:07, 25 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep, reduce to stub & cleanup. Found two English sources supporting WP:RS and WP:V (added to lead), some additional material in German could form the base of a functional description. Available sources however do not support, by far, the currently lengthy article. Note that the German wikipedia article is in pretty much the same sorry state and no further insight can be gained there. --MLauba (talk) 19:20, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment The suggestion that this might meet CSD A7 is odd. We're not talking about a person, a corporation or web content, and the article makes plenty assertions of importance - so many that it's being tagged for WP:NPOV. I'd respectfully suggest in turn that the nominator review WP:A7M for clarity on what A7 is for. --MLauba (talk) 19:26, 25 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment. The nominee has raided other hobby train control articles with AfD noms, e.g. Trainmaster Command Control‎, and has a sock on him. Procedural close as Keep - I played with Märklin trains many, many years ago, and can't possibly imagine that this article should fail inclusion criteria. Cleanup, yes -- deletion, no way. Power.corrupts (talk) 10:14, 26 May 2009 (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.