Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sustainable 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. WP:SNOW. If a redirect is desired it can be WP:BOLDly created. The Bushranger One ping only 01:29, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Sustainable energy vehicle

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Article lacks notability and its short content is blatant original research, and the content is technically wrong. The relevant topic is already covered in two existing articles, alternative fuel vehicle and green vehicle-- Mariordo (talk) 03:39, 29 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. This stub provides a definition that is non sense from a technical point of view, the term is not notable (a Google search restricted to news shows no hits - see here), and some websites (most of them not reliable sources, use the term to refer to hydrogen vehicles. As it is, the content is blatant original research. Also until recently, the article was orphan and it came to my attention precisely because one editor link it to the see also of the existing articles that properly cover this subject.--Mariordo (talk) 03:59, 29 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. As Mariordo says, the article lacks notability and its short content is original research. Johnfos (talk) 04:06, 29 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete or Redirect topic adequately covered elsewhere, if the term has any merit turn it into a redirect NealeFamily (talk) 04:18, 29 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Redirect this neologism/duplicate page to alternative fuel vehicle or green vehicle (Mariordo, is one of these pages a better fit than the other?) . OSX (talk • contributions) 04:23, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Alternative fuel vehicle is a better fit, considering than green vehicles include fuel efficient conventional gasoline- and diesel-powered vehicles, which strictly speaking, are environmentally friendlier but not based on sustainable sources of energy.--Mariordo (talk) 05:09, 29 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete as concept is covered more accurately elsewhere. --Biker Biker (talk) 09:30, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 12:04, 29 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete - This is a virtually unused name. The article contains no references, no facts, nothing to merit inclusion.  Why wasn't this speedied?  Ebikeguy (talk) 13:49, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:15, 29 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete: seems to fail WP:GNG. Also WP:NOTDICT and WP:OR. This seems more like a category than an article. -- BenTels (talk) 18:55, 29 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete As noted above, this is a duplication of other articles. Nwlaw63 (talk) 19:33, 29 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete This smells like an inappropriate fork to me.  Belch fire - TALK  00:52, 30 July 2012 (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.