Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nivomat


 * 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 merge to ZF Sachs.  Sandstein  08:39, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Nivomat

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article appears to be sourced from promotional sources. A search turns up little that would suggest sufficient notability (WP:N) for a stand-alone article, though perhaps the material could be incorporated into the ZF Sachs page. Ganesha811 (talk) 12:54, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Ganesha811 (talk) 12:54, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Ganesha811 (talk) 12:54, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete. I can't find anything that suggests that this particular tradename is notable enough for inclusion. --Sable232 (talk) 23:47, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge to ZF_Sachs: The system is described in "Hydropneumatic Suspension Systems" which could provide a reference, but a merge into the company article may the best consolidation option. AllyD (talk) 07:14, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep. The article is accurately using a term that many in the public domain will likely equate with a class of products, typified by this particular product. For example, a facial tissue, whether made by Kleenex or not, is referred to by the public as 'kleenex'. The use of 'nivomat' in a similar context for the type of product which merges the several components of the automobile suspension into one component is indicated. This does not mean that the Nivomat is the exclusive product under this general heading, but it does appear to be warranted - I offer as exhibit A the fact that I only became aware of the product when they were mentioned generically in a discussion of load-leveling on a mini van web site. This particular product appears to be a good candidate for identification as the representative of the general class of load-leveling struts/shocks. To merge this as is suggested, would dismiss that categorization and probably hide it from the users. Jaydubyah43 (talk) 10:28, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * , I believe that may be the case, but if so, it should be attributed in reliable secondary sources. I didn't see any when I searched, but perhaps I wasn't looking in the right places as I'm not very familiar with automotive issues. If you can find some, do go ahead and add them to the article. Ganesha811 (talk) 12:40, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   20:29, 11 June 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 23:23, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Products-related deletion discussions. North America1000 20:33, 20 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Merge I agree with AllyD that the best course of action is to merge with ZF_Sachs, there aren't enough references to merit a stand-alone article.  HighKing++ 19:40, 24 June 2020 (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.