Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Parallelogram steering linkage

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 no consensus. Scott Mac 12:12, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Parallelogram steering linkage

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

A "parallelogram steering linkage" as described here isn't a parallelogram. See Talk:Parallelogram_steering_linkage#Inaccuracies for further detail. This is one of a number of articles by this editor whose accuracy falls far below the standards required at WP, or (most prolifically) at Commons. Andy Dingley (talk) 00:35, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:00, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:04, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There seem to be quite a few hits for the search term Parallelogram steering linkage on Google and Google books. Obviously the concept is notable. It seems from the discussion page that a redirect to Ackermann steering might be the way to go, but in that case the latter article should at least mention the term, which seems to be fairly standard parlance in automotive mechanics. Sławomir Biały (talk) 15:47, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Are the hits you're seeing describing the same thing as the article is? --Carnildo (talk) 21:58, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Not really.--Pink Bull 05:22, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Rudimentary Google search indicates notability. Whatever is unverified should be deleted, even if it means removing most of the article.--Pink Bull 05:22, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Of the three sentences in this article, which do you consider are worth keeping? The one that says, "A parallelogram linkage is shaped like a parallelogram"? Andy Dingley (talk) 08:56, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Can't see how this is a notable concept. Google searches are not references and cannot indicate notability. Stifle (talk) 09:45, 11 August 2010 (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.