Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Z Electric 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. Notable vehicles get reviews, and we are fully justified in refusing to consider an article on one that does not have that or similar reliable sources. No prejudice againsr re-creation when they become available.  DGG ( talk ) 03:58, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Z Electric Vehicle

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Fails Notability (organizations and companies). There is a single blog post at Gizmag, and beyond that, no independent sources have covered this company. Note that ZEV is a common generic name for a zero emissions (electric) vehicles, and is used by some other Z Electric Vehicle competitors, such as the Vectrix ZEV, which can produce a lot of false search hits, e.g.. Note that while this company does exist, there is no presumption of inherent notability, and as WP:CORPDEPTH explains, there must be sustained, deep coverage, and "A single independent source is almost never sufficient for demonstrating the notability of an organization." Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:22, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 20:26, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 20:26, 20 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete In any case, we've got zero RS for this vehicle. Alessandra Napolitano (talk) 20:27, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Some coverage exists . Peter&#160;E.&#160;James (talk) 20:54, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
 * All of these are blog posts rehashing press releases, or responding to other blog posts, such as the last one that reiterates what Gizmag said. Actual reporting would look something like either riding the scooter itself and writing about it, or researching the company using sources other than press releases. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:05, 20 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, v/r - TP 01:03, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Tom Morris (talk) 01:15, 7 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete In a stunning case of unreliable sources striking again, the second source has this bit of text:
 * the author is the President of the Z Electric Vehicle company.
 * Naturally, this is fine for verifiable information, but it cannot be used to support notability. The other article does provide WP:INDEPTH coverage of the products, but less of the company itself.  Furthermore, this is strongly looking like a case of an article relying on a single source for notability.  The other sources above are largely routine coverage of press releases and at least one of them even refers back to the Gizmodo article for its content.  I, Jethrobot  drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 02:49, 7 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. --Legis (talk - contribs) 06:31, 8 December 2011 (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.