401:- Everything has to pass GNG and I believe this does, or it certainly will do once I gain access to my source material in a few weeks. The LC87 article was deleted because, unlike all this IP's other produce, we didn't clean it up or rewrite it. Nothing vengeful about it – we just got tired of fixing up his rubbish. Someone else outside the project nominated it for deletion and we just didn't step in to save it. We are not obliged to fix articles just because we can. Regarding the notability of F1 cars, I do not believe that all F1 cars are inherently notable, but the majority have more than enough source material out there to pass GNG. It's just a case of putting it all together. Both the LC87 and LC88 can pass GNG without any bother.
283:
talk-pages, and adding unreferenced text to articles. The LC88 (where the referencing did need improving...which it already has been to an extent) was added to the MfD mentioned above on the basis of 'well if the Lola LC87 is proposed for deletion..then what about this one'. There is no reason why this article should be deleted, the car passes notability and the page has references. This proposal should not be seriously considered.
243:- The article on 87 was proposed for deletion for having no references. This article does have references. If the proponent of deletion thinks that the references are inadequate, they may make that statement as the reason for deletion. The two articles are not comparable, in that one was referenced and the other was not. If the deleted article can be properly referenced, it can be resubmitted, either preferably via
321:
most F1 cars do. & the LC87 draft has already been salvaged and is being worked upon. Project members could have fixed the draft, but why should we? (Andy didn't) We kept away from the debate in view of the history as we've fixed literally dozens of articles in the past & our patience with
282:
The Lola LC87 was entirely unreferenced but had some external links which were not the same as the references on the LC88 page. The LC87 was of poor quality and ungrammatical, drafted by an IP editor well known to the F1 project as disruptive through submitting similar poor quality drafts via
373:
On another point, and in the interests of clarity and any future discussions, it has been suggested that to say 'all' F1 cars would pass notability may not be precisely accurate, with which I agree. I have therefore amended my comment above, whilst leaving the original wording in place.
301:
So you admit that the LC87 article wasn't deleted for any reason of notability (both of these cars are tenuous for that) or for referencing (the LC87 had just had the same book references added to it, and not by one of these heinous IP editors), but just for "other" reasons.
316:
The LC87 page was edited entirely by the IP (35 different addresses since
September) editor apart from some attempts to reference it by Andy, which added no in-line citations. Both cars pass F1 project notability,
219:
171:
358:
There was no question of revenge. Editors from the F1 project kept away from the debate for that very reason. The article was judged as poor quality by the reviewer who subsequently tagged it for deletion.
420:- There's enough out there to get this past the GNG. Whether or not the LC87 should have been kept or deleted is irrelevant; it can always be recreated later if it too passes GNG. -
124:
247:
or directly into mainspace. If this article is not properly referenced, then it should be deleted, but I think that it is properly referenced. Your opinion may vary.
165:
440:
326:
paragraph 2.7 as sources have never been provided. The page was deleted because it was poor quality, after it was rejected via AfC several times
263:
They were both referenced, and using the same sites. LC87 didn't use inline citations to them, but that in itself would be no good reason.
225:
That MfD has now closed as delete. However for bureaucratic reasons, an MfD was seen as having no scope over an article, hence this AfD.
131:
17:
97:
92:
186:
101:
222:. This article was listed there too: as both articles suffer exactly the same failings, they stand or fall together.
153:
84:
474:
252:
62:
40:
448:
425:
207:
406:
147:
349:
307:
268:
230:
470:
36:
143:
248:
203:
58:
454:
431:
410:
383:
368:
353:
335:
311:
292:
272:
256:
234:
66:
444:
421:
179:
402:
379:
364:
331:
288:
193:
345:
303:
264:
226:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
469:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
211:
218:. Both articles depend on a handful of deadlinks and sources seen as unacceptable. See
159:
88:
54:
375:
360:
327:
284:
244:
323:
118:
215:
80:
72:
220:
Knowledge:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Lola LC87 (2nd nomination)
463:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
210:. This is one of two articles on cars of this period, the
114:
110:
106:
178:
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
477:). No further edits should be made to this page.
340:The place to deal with a tendentious editor is
192:
8:
439:Note: This debate has been included in the
441:list of Sports-related deletion discussions
438:
322:this editor has run out. His edits are
344:by revenge article deletions at MfD.
7:
24:
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
455:12:39, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
432:12:38, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
67:00:03, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
411:01:51, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
384:01:34, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
369:20:52, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
354:18:24, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
336:11:02, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
312:10:37, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
293:10:30, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
273:09:51, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
257:03:40, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
235:02:12, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
494:
466:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
245:Articles for Creation
208:CambridgeBayWeather
55:(non-admin closure)
457:
57:
485:
468:
451:
428:
197:
196:
182:
134:
122:
104:
53:
34:
493:
492:
488:
487:
486:
484:
483:
482:
481:
475:deletion review
464:
453:
449:
430:
426:
249:Robert McClenon
204:Robert McClenon
202:Per request of
139:
130:
95:
79:
76:
59:DavidLeighEllis
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
491:
489:
480:
479:
459:
458:
447:
445:The Bushranger
435:
434:
424:
422:The Bushranger
414:
413:
395:
394:
393:
392:
391:
390:
389:
388:
387:
386:
371:
296:
295:
276:
275:
260:
259:
200:
199:
136:
75:
70:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
490:
478:
476:
472:
467:
461:
460:
456:
452:
450:One ping only
446:
442:
437:
436:
433:
429:
427:One ping only
423:
419:
416:
415:
412:
408:
404:
403:Bretonbanquet
400:
397:
396:
385:
381:
377:
372:
370:
366:
362:
357:
356:
355:
351:
347:
343:
339:
338:
337:
333:
329:
325:
320:
315:
314:
313:
309:
305:
300:
299:
298:
297:
294:
290:
286:
281:
278:
277:
274:
270:
266:
262:
261:
258:
254:
250:
246:
242:
239:
238:
237:
236:
232:
228:
223:
221:
217:
213:
209:
205:
195:
191:
188:
185:
181:
177:
173:
170:
167:
164:
161:
158:
155:
152:
149:
145:
142:
141:Find sources:
137:
133:
129:
126:
120:
116:
112:
108:
103:
99:
94:
90:
86:
82:
78:
77:
74:
71:
69:
68:
64:
60:
56:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
465:
462:
417:
398:
346:Andy Dingley
341:
318:
304:Andy Dingley
279:
265:Andy Dingley
240:
227:Andy Dingley
224:
201:
189:
183:
175:
168:
162:
156:
150:
140:
127:
49:
47:
31:
28:
166:free images
471:talk page
216:Lola LC88
212:Lola LC87
81:Lola LC88
73:Lola LC88
37:talk page
473:or in a
376:Eagleash
361:Eagleash
328:Eagleash
285:Eagleash
214:and the
125:View log
39:or in a
172:WP refs
160:scholar
98:protect
93:history
144:Google
102:delete
342:never
324:WP:TE
187:JSTOR
148:books
132:Stats
119:views
111:watch
107:links
16:<
418:Keep
407:talk
399:Keep
380:talk
365:talk
350:talk
332:talk
308:talk
289:talk
280:Keep
269:talk
253:talk
241:Keep
231:talk
206:and
180:FENS
154:news
115:logs
89:talk
85:edit
63:talk
50:keep
319:all
194:TWL
123:– (
52:.
443:.
409:)
382:)
367:)
352:)
334:)
310:)
291:)
271:)
255:)
233:)
174:)
117:|
113:|
109:|
105:|
100:|
96:|
91:|
87:|
65:)
405:(
378:(
363:(
348:(
330:(
306:(
287:(
267:(
251:(
229:(
198:)
190:·
184:·
176:·
169:·
163:·
157:·
151:·
146:(
138:(
135:)
128:·
121:)
83:(
61:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.