Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Isuzu Forward

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 speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) U¹ _quattro TALK 02:12, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Isuzu Forward

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Having no sources and being poorly written goes against this article. This seems not far from personal research with no claims to backup anything that is claimed or written. Wiki could do a lot better without such poor quality articles. U¹ _quattro TALK 04:50, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. U¹ _quattro TALK 04:50, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting rather than soft deleting as if this is not notable it seems likely there would be a redirect or merge target.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 21:55, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Isuzu Motors since the vehicle is already mentioned there and it doesn't seem notable enough on it's own to warrant a stand alone article.

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:11, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - a long running nameplate, definitely deserves a better article. I agree that those lists of alphabet combinations are not particularly useful. I have some sources too in my library but I will have to dig them up. Mr.choppers | ✎ 11:42, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I agree with Northamerica1000 we don't need poor articles like these hovering around on Wiki. These just degrade the encyclopedia if anything.U¹ _quattro TALK 14:30, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi U1Quattro: I only provided deletion sorting for this discussion; I have not provided an opinion. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:02, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Mr Choppers as well per the fact it's a notable nameplate - The article improving not deleting. –Davey2010^Talk 14:47, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The main reason for the deletion of this article is this: Information on Wikipedia must be verifiable; if no reliable, independent sources can be found on a topic, then it should not have a separate article.U¹ _quattro TALK 10:29, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - per Davey2010 Ed talk! 01:52, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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.