Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Modular agile transit: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
clarify; copy edit |
No edit summary |
||
Line 9:
There are several sources listed at bottom of article, but most are not _about_ the "Modular agile transit" ... most of the sources simply support individual facts stated in the article (but the sources do not mention the M.A.T.). [[User:Noleander|Noleander]] ([[User talk:Noleander|talk]]) 00:22, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
*<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This discussion has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Transportation|list of Transportation-related deletion discussions]]. '''[[User:Wcquidditch|<span style="color:red">WC</span>''<span style="color:#999933">Quidditch</span>'']]''' [[User talk:Wcquidditch|<span style="color:red">☎</span>]] [[Special:Contribs/Wcquidditch|<span style="color:#999933">✎</span>]] 00:33, 18 May 2025 (UTC)</small>
*'''Delete''' Honestly surprised to see such a poor article from such a long-time editor. Cite 1 has the wrong DOI# but should link to [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0968090X22000729], which is a computer model about modular vehicles but is not about "agile" transit or an actual system. 2 is some totally irrelevant software source, 3 is about carsharing not transit, 4 seems relevant but is also just a model, 5 has a title that's merely about electric buses but the DOI link goes to something else, 6 seems relevant but is also just a computer model and does not use "agile", 7 is a good book but irrelevant, and 8 is also irrelevant. So the article is a lot of fluff, unsourced statements, and ref-bomb material. What is going on here? Like I understand what the article's getting at, but since it's just a research concept I agree with nom that this reads as a student article rather than something that should have a standalone page. [[User:Reywas92|Reywas92]]<sup>[[User talk:Reywas92|Talk]]</sup> 02:20, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
| |||