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. — Cirt (talk) 01:52, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lima Class 57 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

The article is about a specific model of a railway locomotive. Not the class of locomotive the model is based on (British Rail Class 57) or the manufacturer. It is a product that doesn't meet WP:N - a real locomotive is notable, a model railway manufacturer might be. In outside sources the model only gets a mention in model railway magazines: in the product reviews section, or in product catalogues. Wongm (talk) 13:56, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete This nom was a bit ambiguous, as is the article. The article in question is about a miniature model locomotive, not the actual big engine used on rails. It apparently fails notability due to a lack of significant coverage in multiple reliable and independent sources. A toy or model does not automatically inherit notability from the real world thing it imitates, which has its own article, and whose notability is not in question here. Not even a redirect is indicated. Edison (talk) 15:35, 29 June 2011 (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.