Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tesla Model S manufacturing process


 * 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 Tesla Factory. Consensus is for a limited merge, moving the more significant material and leaving behind less important and/or overly promotional material. Tesla Model S might be a better merge target for some parts. The details are left up to whoever takes on doing the merge. There's no reason to hide the article history, so once the merge is done, redirect this title to Tesla Factory. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:11, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Tesla Model S manufacturing process

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Nothing at all special--it is essentially just additional publicity for the car. There is nothing at all about the manufacturing process that is in any way special.  DGG ( talk ) 20:18, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.  Everymorning   talk  20:40, 25 April 2015 (UTC)


 * keep but rewrite to seem less of an ad. There are unique things about the manufacture so an article is warranted. The factory is a slightly different subject Deepavali 2014 (talk) 05:34, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Agreed, reading the article it seems that it's purpose is promotion of the car, through conveniently placed statements, complementary language and pictures of smiling employees posing for photos. Delete. Elassint  Hi 21:37, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Edit: If there are unique aspects about the production of this car, than they should be merged on Tesla Model S, or Tesla Factory if that article is notable. However, I don't see the point of a single car model having an entire article about it's production, even if it happens to use a lot of robots. Elassint  Hi 16:27, 26 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep
 * Neutral_point_of_view: The article has a neutral point of view, it simply describes the processes that takes place. To address Elassint's comment the reason that two of the photos have people involved in the company standing next to them is that no photography is allowed inside the factory so only these (good quality) images from the manufacturer are available under an open licence.
 * To address Notability guidelines in order:
 * Significant coverage: The Model S production process is covered at length by a number of sources, many of which are used as references in the article. There are even two full length TV programmes about this manufacturing process, both of which are used as references.
 * Reliable: The sources are reliable as per Identifying_reliable_sources.
 * Sources should be secondary sources: Out of the 17 sources only 1 is a primary source, the Tesla Motors website.
 * Independent of the subject: As above, all sources are independent except 1.
 * Summary_style: There's plenty of source material but it would unbalance the Tesla Model S or Tesla Factory article to include all this information, it is an appropriate fork.
 * Thanks
 * Mrjohncummings (talk) 22:12, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
 * You have made a strong argument that this article uses proper secondary sourcing. However, the nominator seems to be stating that the assembly of this particular model of car isn't unique enough from other cars to merit it's own article (at least that's how I'm interpreting the opening argument). As the creator of this article, how do you respond to this? Elassint  Hi 22:43, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi Elassint, I think the fact there are several unique components in the car including the battery pack (giving it the highest range for an production electric car by quite a way), battery module, and drive unit (the P85 is of the fastest accelerating production cars) make it different enough from other car's manufacturing processes to have its own article. Cheers Mrjohncummings (talk) 23:13, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I have just added some extra information, the production processes uses 10 of the largest robots in the world and the press lines used to create the body panels are the largest in North America and the 6th largest in the world.Mrjohncummings (talk) 11:07, 26 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete - there is nothing notable about the manufacturing process. The entire article reeks of publicity and to justify its inclusion attempts to establish notability for the routine. Greglocock (talk) 00:09, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Merge with Tesla Factory or Tesla Model S, with somewhat less detail. Or merge parts to both.  It just doesn't seem right to have an article on the process of the manufacture of one car model when the process is part of what makes the other things special.Borock (talk) 01:38, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * While we're at it there's nothing notable about the Tesla Factory.Greglocock (talk) 01:53, 26 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Merge with Tesla Factory or Tesla Model S, as suggested above. Should be substantially shortened to avoid skewing the balance of those articles with trivial details of painting processes. The Blue Canoe  13:52, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Merge I have to agree. If we're going to have a Tesla Factory article, than this article should be part of it. Merging the two articles would also fix some of the problems in the Tesla Factory article. If we're going to delete the Tesla Factory article as not notable too (note that there is a Gigafactory article, which is definitely notable, and likely deserves its own article), then having a major subsection in the Model S article would probably work, too. Either way though, I don't see a point in having both a Tesla Factory and this article. One of them should be merged into the other. &mdash; Gopher65talk 15:55, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:07, 26 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Merge There's nothing special about Tesla's manufacturing process. The content of this article however is well written and should be folded into Tesla Factory and Tesla Model S where possible. Ergzay (talk) 22:23, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Merge into Tesla Factory and Tesla Model S. There is no reason to have this as a separate article; however, the information would be beneficial on those two articles. Inks.LWC (talk) 07:04, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Merge with either Tesla Factory or Tesla Model S as per above.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 13:27, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - this article reads like Tesla's promotional website. The brief description on the main Tesla Model S page is sufficient. There is little unique about the manufacturing process of this vehicle to merit its own article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pauerbach08 (talk • contribs) 01:22, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Merge with factory article. Keep in mind this sort of a historical continuation to Fremont Assembly as far as site use is concerned.  Nyth 63  01:45, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Also can be shortened considerably by removing everything not unique to the Tesla. For example, mounting the wheels? Looks like a lot of either copy/paste or transcribing from a video.  Nyth 63  06:46, 5 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Merge: Nothing more needs to be said. Solntsa90 (talk) 07:22, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep the article is very informative, maybe rewrite to seem less of an ad. and to enhance NPOV.--Khalid hassani (talk) 13:32, 6 May 2015 (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.