Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Autobesity

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. Doczilla _{@SUPERHEROLOGIST} 06:06, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Autobesity[edit]

[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)

This article has very little information, is based mostly on subjective opinion, and is on a topic that is not notable. WP:NRV WP:GNG Joseph Zadeh (talk) 04:09, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Joseph Zadeh (talk) 04:09, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Smerge to Criticism of SUVs is what I would suggest. Recent articles in places like The Guardian make this a plausible search term.—S Marshall T/C 09:13, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The article needs to be expanded, but this is a growing phenomenon and the discussion is reaching new parts of the globe. --DaddyCell (talk) 12:53, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Criticism of SUVs. This isn't really it's own thing. The growing phenomenon is just that there are more SUVs and SUVs are bad, which is already covered. No need for a separtate article here. Reywas92^Talk
Keep - Seems to meet the WP:GNG. The article seems to be referring to a broader phenomenon affecting the entire automobile market and not just SUVs. High WP:POTENTIAL for this article to be expanded over time if sources keep covering the subject in the way that they have been. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 12:10, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe Criticism of SUVs needs to be reworked; almost everything in the article applies to pick-up trucks or the market as a whole as well. I just do not see this as a really separate topic and should be integrated into the main article explaining how the criticisms are becoming more relevant and how the criticisms are being addressed; it could be split if necessary but I don't think leaving this stub on a neologism for hypothetical expansion is appropriate. Reywas92^Talk 05:44, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as opinion is divided between Merge and Keep.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:22, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This could use a move to a less interesting title, but the trend towards bigger cars a notable-enough phenomenon to warrant coverage in secondary sources about energy efficiency in general, e.g. this one from the IEA. It is not just about criticizing SUVs; this trend is also affecting ordinary cars and pickup trucks. Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 22:47, 20 November 2023 (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.