- 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 keep. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:01, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Red Bull RB10 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
It is very vague and needs more information to be included in wikipedia. Authenticity to be checked. SajjadF (talk) 23:32, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Red Bull Racing has won the Formula One Constructors' Championship in each of the last three years, and is likely to win it again this year. A new car from that team for the 2014 season, and with the technological innovations dictated by the new rules coming into force for 2014, is certainly a candidate for a new article. I created this new article and the current content is all supported by the sources provided. Freimütig (talk) 21:06, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete It is fair to say the car will exist but everything about it even (or especially) in the source is speculation. Even the name of the car is assumed. While one source states the cars name as being RB10 that is not confirmed by anyone in the article itself. Premature creation. WP:SPECULATION --Falcadore (talk) 09:08, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:43, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- WP:SPECULATION allows for verifiable speculation, if notable and almost certain to take place, and this is just that. One of the 2 sources I provided is the website of Red Bull themselves. And if they are speculating that their next car, following in the footsteps of their RB1, RB2, RB3, RB4, RB5, RB6, RB7, RB8 and RB9, will be the RB10, that surely passes the WP:SPECULATION tests. Freimütig (talk) 21:16, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- My bad, upon first reading of the Red Bull website reference I couldn't find the RB10 name, but found it on the second attempt. Neverthless the article remains almost entirely speculative and my original opinion is unchanged. --Falcadore (talk) 23:45, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, perhaps even speedy keep as the nominator does not make anything close to a policy-based argument for deletion. Being "vague" and needing "authenticity checked" are cleanup issues; AfD is not for cleanup. WP:CRYSTAL does not apply; WP:TOOSOON might, but given that the 2013 season is nearly over and preparations for 2014 are well underway, there is likely to be sufficent data already to meet WP:N, and a quick Googling confirms this in my mind. - The Bushranger One ping only 02:06, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: - Although the article will eventually be created, it's too soon. In the past, these pages have never really been created until all of the chassis designations are known, and sometimes not even then. Reading the article, its creation appears to be based entirely on the designation, and to serve as a link to 2014 Formula One season cars and Renault Energy F1-2014 so that they are not orphaned. Those pages have their own issues that need to be dealt with separately. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 04:39, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, sufficient degree of verifiable speculation on the topic seems to currently exist, or at worst, will most certainly exist in coming weeks. Best to improve vagueness and add more information. AdventurousSquirrel (talk) 07:11, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: - That information probably won't exist until March, when the car actually competes unless there is a major episode affecting it's development, like the Lotus E20. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 10:39, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep The topic is evidently notable. Warden (talk) 10:58, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
References[edit]
- 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.