Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vactrain


 * 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The result was Withdrawn. I respect the feelings of my fellow wikipedians who feels the long history of the concept of vactrain should be kept. So I Happily withdraw my nomination Anoptimistix (talk) 01:28, 5 September 2017 (UTC) (non-admin closure) Anoptimistix (talk) 01:28, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Vactrain

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The page was created on 1 December 2005 by an IP contributor. Though I respect the hard work of IP user done in the process of creating this article, and has been almost 12 years, we've failed to see this train coming in reality in any place of this world. More than an encyclopedia article about a train this article reads like a fictious imaginary article Anoptimistix   "Message Me"  03:06, 3 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep - Even if it is never made into a physical reality, the concept and its long history still deserve to be documented. At the moment it is useful for putting providing a background and historical context for the hyperloop. If the hyperloop never succeeds then maybe the vactrain article will provide inspiration for another implementation in the future. Isn't that a worthy goal of any article? Or should we just stop inventing here?  Stepho  talk 04:51, 3 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep: Um, wow! It's been almost TWELVE (count them: 1... 2... 3... -- 12) years since the article's creation and just NOW someone is complaining that it should be lost? Uhhh... I think if nobody caught it for this long, it should stay simply as some sort of a "punishment" for your not having dealt with the (non-)"problem" over a decade ago!


 * Goodness! 75.162.197.67 (talk) 05:33, 3 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep Success ≠ notability. Dlthewave (talk) 12:38, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep unrealised ideas can be notable enough for articles too--Darrelljon (talk) 13:33, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep This is not WP:CRYSTAL, this is history (sort of). There are hundreds of similar articles in physics, and computer. Like Tachyons, a hypothetical particle that doesnt even exist; and another about an operating system. There was extensive work done on the OS, but it was never released, still it is notable enough in history, and in reality as well. I want to delete the article for Kareena Kapoor's son. He got an article just for being born. — usernamekiran (talk)  11:40, 4 September 2017 (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.