Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tsybin RSR

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. John254 00:20, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tsybin RSR[edit]

No sources to establish notability, or to even prove the project actully existed. Article has existed since July 4 2006 (longer than I've been a WPian by nearly 2 months), yet has still not been improved. My effort to try a less-contentious route with a simple PROD was stymied by an apparent new user. Hence we're here - I'm much too busy as one of "Jimbo's serfs" to play around. ~~If proper reliable sources can be provided and added to the article per WP policy, I will consider withdrawing the nom at that point. (I'll just let someone else decide this without my interference.)~~ - BillCJ (talk) 09:33, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AFD Withdrawn - As I stated in the nom, the article had no "proof" of notability, but thanks to the hard work of Nigel and others, it does now. Other mitigating circumstances in this case have been brought to my attention, so I am withdrawing my nomination. - BillCJ (talk) 22:46, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep Oh yes, it was real enough. this isn't strictly a reliable source, but it's well-referenced and, in my experience, extremely reputable. I'll see what I can find. --Rlandmann (talk) 09:39, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Project did exist and is mentioned in Bill Gunston's The Osprey Encyclopedia of Russian Aircraft 1875-1995. I seem to vaguely remember seeing a magazine article on it as well - possibly in Air Enthusiast. A single seat low powered demonstrator (the NM-1, which is the aircraft shown in Rlandmanns link was built and flown, and 5 of the final version were virtually completed before the programme was cancelled.Nigel Ish (talk) 17:44, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've now expanded the article a bit (and added more references)Nigel Ish (talk) 20:27, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It does need further development, but if we AfD'd every article in WP that needs the same, it'd probably account for some 75% of the extant articles. Askari Mark (Talk) 19:19, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep It's featured on Globalsecurity.org - Here. Also, you can find many additional drawings of the aircraft here. TheAsianGURU (talk) 21:26, 28 February 2008 (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.