Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Exoskeleton car

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 speedy keep. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:37, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Exoskeleton car

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

Strictly original research (WP:OR) and wholly unsourced article, other than that there is no saving grace of this article. Donnie Park (talk) 18:08, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

'Keep Poor sourcing of an article on a notable topic is reason to work to fix it, not delete it. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:36, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 01:36, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 01:36, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:07, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Notable article that needs some work. Should not be deleted. Ref added. Samf4u (talk) 15:50, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Further comment I request to withdraw this nomination. Donnie Park (talk) 17:35, 25 June 2016 (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.