Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Passenger Carrying Vehicle

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 delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:14, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Passenger Carrying Vehicle

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Passenger Carrying Vehicle (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Stub - unsourced for over 10 years, has little more than a single paragraph, and hasn’t been edited since 2022. I would strongly argue this fails notability. Danners430 (talk) 16:42, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Danners430 (talk) 16:42, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• I should note that article size and lack of editing are not proper arguments for deletion, and absolutely not indicators against notability. That said, this looks very much like a WP:DICDEF. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 19:29, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I'll take note of those points... but I also agree that it's not the only reasons for the proposed deletion! Danners430 (talk) 19:31, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Is a legal term, but doesn't say where it's used (Canada, US, UK, South Africa?). I can pull up sources from all these places, but they're simply texts of various pieces of legislation, nothing showing notability for the term. Article is unsourced, which doesn't help. Oaktree b (talk) 21:28, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above and DICDEF. XtraJovial (talk • contribs) 03:14, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete if this was a brand new article that would be one thing, but it is instead 10 years old and is very poorly sourced. It is not likely to improve based on age any time soon. Iljhgtn (talk) 21:16, 29 June 2025 (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.