This article was nominated for deletion on 20 October 2009 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

This article is legitimate and neutral as it list in references several competing short shifter manufacturers--Jemesouviens32 (talk) 14:39, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Its problem however is that the only reference is to one manufacturer's publicity site. This is not a reliable reference, especially when it comes to comparing the competing products, and things such as incidence of failure. DJ Clayworth (talk) 14:41, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comment DJ Clayworth two separate references are cited as well as two other manufacturers which have exactly the same commercial challenges from product knock offs and incidences of failure as the primary references one of which is a de.wikipedia article --Jemesouviens32 (talk) 14:50, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the german wikipedia as a reference, wikipedia is not a reliable source. I also removed all the external links, WP:ELNO#5 discusses external links that are primarily used to sell products should not be listed as external links. ~~ GB fan ~~ ^talk 13:57, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, some of the issues appear to be factually incorrect. Not all short shifters are after market modifications. Many companies sell them as a standard option. The article does need a fair bit of work... Hobit (talk) 12:41, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Have added references to Mazda and Porsche both offering this component as stock and as an option further dispelling the notion of lack of notability and neutrality--Jemesouviens32 (talk) 08:02, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]