Talk:Innovia APM

Note to CSD reviewer

This same article was deleted G11 last week.JBH (talk) 16:53, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I tagged the article with multiple issues. I believe the article could be salvaged if these are addressed in a timely manner. Thoughts? Regards, Aloha27 talk 17:52, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

All of the references are still to Bombardier marketing material and the text reads like low key marketing material. There are already pages for many of their products which probably be combined into a single article. We are not a marketing site for their different product lines. Right now there are five articles on the various offerings of this company. Whether it is a G11 still is a judgement call.

Contested deletion

This page is not unambiguously promotional, because it provides objective information about a mode of transportation used in many different countries. The original page that was marked for speedy deletion was rewritten to be more encyclopedic. The previous version only described technology's three models, while the new version provides insightful information about how and where this transportation system is applied, where it's currently installed, the technology history, etc. The content is all factual and is no different to other transportation pages on Wikipedia (such as Honda Civic). Yes, it is about a product made by a private company, but its neutral, fact-based information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SYSComms (talk • contribs) 17:59, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It would be helpful to know what issues it was flagged for. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SYSComms (talk • contribs) 18:02, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The issues in question are at the top of the article page. Regards, Aloha27 talk 18:28, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest AfD

I started cleaning up the unsourced original research, promotion, and primary sources, then started checking the sources, but none of the sources I checked actually supported the article-text. I also noticed we have an article on Bombardier Innovia APM 200 with no citations. I would support deletion, as by time I clean up all the sources that do not support the article-text, nothing will be left. CorporateM (Talk) 02:42, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

So I began poking around a bit more before nominating. I'm thinking Bombardier Innovia APM 100 and Bombardier Innovia APM 200 may need similar trims for promotion and OR, then it may make sense to consolidate all three articles here. CorporateM (Talk) 04:26, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I agree about the trims. I am not very familiar with the structure of company articles. Would it be proper to put all of their notable products on Bombardier Inc.? JBH (talk) 05:08, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support deletion. I've been watching this page since it was relaunched and hoping it could be salvaged. With a lack of secondary sources, sadly I agree that it ought to be sent to the elite ranks of the NON-participants. Regards, Aloha27 talk 14:29, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]