Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Honda GY6 Engine

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 no consensus. Listed for 21 days with no arguments for deletion aside from the nominator but not enough comments to establish a consensus. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:11, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Honda GY6 Engine

No sources, not notable. I'm pretty sure the GY6 exists, and it has been used on something [1] but that's about all that can be verified, just barely. The sources who claim it is ubiquitous are all trying to sell you something on the premise that it is ubiquitous [2] i.e. parts are widely available and there is lots of tuning and performance know-how. I have to wonder why all this lore hasn't been printed in any books or magazines.[3][4]. Dbratland (talk) 03:09, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 03:35, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There are enough sources to make it verifiable, but there doesn't seem to be enough to establish notability. Can it be merged somewhere? As there list articles of engines? A Honda engine article? ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:50, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure we can even verify that Honda really did design an engine called the GY6, only that some companies are making an engine whose design they, um, obtained or acquired somehow, and they tout it as being of Honda lineage because the public respects the brand. Honda seems to be making no effort to lend credibility to these claims. I am one who is willing to set the bar for WP:V and WP:N pretty low sometimes, but not this low.--Dbratland (talk) 20:16, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:49, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep From the article, it seems that this is the origin of a whole class of small engines used very widely. Now all we need is some refs to show it. DGG (talk) 00:07, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 21:42, 25 June 2009 (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.