Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vehicle registration plates of the United States for 1902


 * 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. The article has been substantially worked on during the course of the AfD, so I'm giving higher weight to the chronologically later comments, all of which are keeps. -- RoySmith (talk) 01:43, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

Vehicle registration plates of the United States for 1902

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The article has no content. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 04:07, 23 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment (Author) - I disagree with deletion. There is content in both articles, and there is far more content than many other starter articles. Just because this article will never be filled with a picture of the license plate from all 50 states is not a reason for deletion. This is part of a series of 119 articles that show the annual history of license plates in the United States, its territories, and the District of Columbia. To remove this article would remove part of the early history of the automobile industry, individual state history of how vehicle license plates evolved across the country, and what has become an area of collector activity. Zcarstvnz (talk) 08:37, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 08:52, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 08:52, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 08:52, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Draftify per my staement here. Nightfury 09:10, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Merge everything from 1901 to 1905; rather than having a table showing no actual plate designs and indicating the need for owners to supply their own, have a table indicating the date at which these requirements were initiated. bd2412  T 15:44, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Merge per bd2412. There's simply no sign of this being a topic that justifies per-year articles for these dates. power~enwiki ( π,  ν ) 18:39, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 10:29, 30 January 2019 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep The article has been on line for less than 30 days, and some additional material has been added since the article was listed here. Leaving the article will give other editors the ability to add new information and keep the series of articles intact back to its true beginnings rather than try and force the material into a merged article. Zcarstvnz (talk) 08:17, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sheldybett (talk) 01:10, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. AFD really is not the best way to sort out this kind of problem. Breaking a series of set list articles by deleting one page would be utterly confusing to our readers.  We had a similar issue with the sunspots by year pages a while back; the early years were pretty empty.  It turned out though, as more editors took a look, that there was something notable to say about every year and afair no page ended up deleted.  Having said that, formatting the page as a table that is guaranteed to stay largely empty forever (because plates weren't issued in those states) is not good.  But this is best resolved by normal editing and talk page discussion.  Some sort of merge of the early years as suggested by BD2412 is one solution (not the only one) but I think merging up to 1905 is too far.  That one at least has one image and the potential for a lot more. Same can be said for 1904. SpinningSpark 08:15, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. Now that the 1901 article has been accepted, deleting the 1902 article does not make sense. Material is slowly being found and added. The 1903 article now has two photos. Similar to the sunspot articles mentioned above, as others discover the articles more material is likely to be added. Zcarstvnz (talk) 13:55, 9 February 2019 (UTC) Zcarstvnz (talk) 13:56, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment. For reference, the sunsport AFD is at Articles for deletion/Solar cycle 1. Spinning<b style="color:#4840A0">Spark</b> 14:45, 10 February 2019 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.