Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Schütte-Lanz G.IV


 * 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. And rewrite / improve, obviously.  Sandstein  16:10, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Schütte-Lanz G.IV

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

completely Non-notable, the aircraft never existed (only as a project) and the article, as written, is gobbledy gook, barely mentioning the subject anyway Petebutt (talk) 15:02, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 15:26, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 15:26, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 15:26, 15 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. The incoherence derives from the fact this is a not very good translation from German Wikipedia, and it was also placed at an incorrect title. This article translates all but the first sentence of de:Schütte-Lanz G.I-V, and is about a whole series of aircraft designs, 1 through 5. The German article provides a further reference documenting the notability of the topic. Unfortunately for context, we also lack an article in English on the company: Schütte-Lanz redirects to List of Schütte-Lanz airships, but the German de:Schütte-Lanz has a table of the company's airplane/aeroplane designs (Flugzeuge), from which it can be seen that G.I was built but the others in the G series remained on the drawing board; this is the territory covered by this article. If kept as I hope it will be, the article should be moved and given a clear introduction, in addition to having the translation touched up and additional links provided for information. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:12, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep and move Schütte-Lanz G.I, as very well-explaine dby Yngvadottir. A trout (again) to Pete for not paying attention to what the article actually says, as well as implying that "not built = non-notable" (which is entirely not the case). - The Bushranger One ping only 20:02, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
 * TROUT firmly rejected. All that I say in the nomination is correct. Most of the info is already incorporated in Schütte-Lanz G.I, so why have a very poorly written article on a non-existent subject with information already in another article.--Petebutt (talk) 13:38, 22 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep Just needs tidying and expansion. A post at WT:AIR would be a first stop for assistance, AfD is a last resort. We have many articles on aircraft design projects that did not materialise, Hawker Siddeley HS.141 is an example. I can help with German translations and creating an article on the Schütte-Lanz company, what is there is a true translation, just not using optimum grammar. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by)    01:06, 16 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Still delete I have re-written the article with all the information known aboutr the G.IV. Teh rest is up to you--Petebutt (talk) 14:10, 22 September 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.