Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yamaha XJR400

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. The problems are fixable. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:56, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yamaha XJR400[edit]

No content. Just an infobox. Biker Biker (talk) 21:56, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Just as many articles need rewriting of lists as text, this article needs conversion from an information box to text. The box has a lot of information. It would be easy to write complete sentences to incorporate the information in text. Fg2 (talk) 02:47, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, an infobox does not constitute an article. Besides that, there is noting to show as to why this subject is notable, fails to satisfy the general notability guideline with significant coverage in reliable, third-party, sources. Esradekan Gibb ^"Klat" 11:05, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can you say that "Articles for which all attempts to find reliable sources to verify them have failed" applies to this article?? This is a old bike, which means that there are not all that many (actually only 717000 Ghits) pages on the internet, this does NOT mean that nothing is written about it. --Stefan ^talk 01:44, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 14:30, 12 July 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) 00:01, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Esradekan. Wikipedia is not a directory. The JPS ^{talk to me} 00:27, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep No content is not a reson for deletion, article actually have content (although only a info box), is notable (I assume that all vehicles are notable), as stated in the deletion policy the page should be improved not deleted. --Stefan ^talk 01:27, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It has content now and it's marked as a stub. Eventually it will grow, especially since we have been sorting, linking and categorizing many of these lost sheep.--Dbratland (talk) 21:21, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. "Just an infobox" is an invitation to anyone familiar with Wikipedia formatting to help develop the article, not to call for its deletion. How is nothing better than something? For anyone with an interest in building an encyclopedia rather than playing an MM-whatever-it's-called game to see who can "win" discussions I would have thought that the answer would be pretty obvious. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:44, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There are sources available on Google Books, and maybe a few on Google News. The article just needs love. tedder (talk) 00:37, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Notice I has marked the article as a stub. I am netural here. My stubbify diff here[1]. Text adding diff by User:Stefan here[2].The Junk Police (reports|works) 04:10, 19 July 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.