Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tiger avon

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The result was RESULT Nomination withdrawn. Triwbe (talk) 15:23, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tiger avon

When I saw this article I was sure it was an advert, so I proposed it for speedy deletion. This was declined, so I and others tagged it for various things. The originator appears to be ~~either~~ a bloke who's built one ~~or "Jim" who is part of the company (contact details on its website)~~, but doesn't seem to be enthusiastic enough to come back and build a good article, nor even to get the capitalisation right. So I'm concerned that this is ~~a COI article that is~~ a thinly disguised advert. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 11:43, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The parent company article already got speedied. This has no independent RS references. Googling shows quite a bit of social networking between builders/owners/sellers of these things and there is a company offering a specialist insurance policy on them. It isn't spammy in tone but if it was notable, I would expect something like this to turn up in reviews/articles in car magazines or in TV shows about cars. If anybody can dig up some references to that then that would change my mind. --DanielRigal (talk) 11:55, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. —Triwbe (talk) 14:19, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Unless someone can save it. --Triwbe (talk) 17:13, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep it:I wrote the article, and have no involvement with tiger racing what so ever, i will delete the reference to tiger racings website as it is easy enough to find on google anyway —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamrogers (talk • contribs) 17:40, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually what would be most helpful is if you cna dig up some sources for it. Artw (talk) 20:30, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sources added: I have added sources and catagorised the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamrogers (talk • contribs) 22:15, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Withdraw Nomination on the basis of the TV show. One source looks ok, though it is a local paper. The youtube one will have to go, I'm afraid, but citing the show and episode itself is highly valid (and should be done) and does establish the notability for me. I do know that withdrawal does not mean "keep", and the article does need more citations for me to be 100% comfortable. But the sources as they stand would have prevented my nomination. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 00:05, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The "TV Show" doesn't (AFAIK) reference the Avon, but only the Z100. I see the TV show and speed record as justification for Tiger Racing or even the Z100, but not a stand-alone article on a different model. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:47, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as article has ben improved and nomination has ben withdrawn. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 00:58, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep major improvement on article. thanks Timtrent for closing the AfD. Ikip (talk) 03:12, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as promised. --Triwbe (talk) 03:36, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge (or rename, as the parent seems to have been deleted already) to Tiger Racing. The manufacturer, particularly as the manufacturers of the notable Z100, its unusual powertrain and its speed record, is notable. I can't see justification for per-model articles on everything they make. The Tiger avon in isolation is no more significant or notable than any of the many other similar UK kitcars and less notable than a Caterham or the Dutton Phaeton (NB - Kitcars in the UK are a more significant topic than they are in other countries, owing to the still-sizable interest in them stemming from obscure tax rules 50 years ago). Andy Dingley (talk) 20:45, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Move to Tiger Racing. Peterkingiron (talk) 22:49, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The article has improved and the nomination has been withdrawn. --J.Mundo (talk) 14:41, 3 February 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.