The intent of this page is to give guidelines for consistent decisions in articles for deletion and merging discussions. It does not replace the WP:N requirement for significant coverage in secondary sources. This page should not be used to make decisions for WP:Criteria for speedy deletion.

These guidelines are an extension of Wikipedia:Notability, and reflect the following core Wikipedia policies:

Claims of notability must adhere to Wikipedia's policy on attribution; it is not enough to simply assert that an article meets a criterion without substantiating that claim with reliable sources.

Coverage notes[edit]

This page provides notability criteria for all types of machines and devices (other than models and toys[1]) that transport a payload, including but not limited to human beings. As such, it covers a broad array of devices, from bicycles to spacecraft.

The page addresses five types of articles:

This page does not provide criteria for imaginary, fictional,[3] or hypothetical vehicles, but does cover projects currently under development as well as abandoned projects and design studies where the resulting product would have been covered by these guidelines had it been completed.

Criteria[edit]

Note that the line between "type", "subtype", and "unique" is not necessarily clear-cut; and has occasionally been deliberately blurred in one direction or the other for political and/or marketing reasons. In general, Wikipedia editors should be guided by distinctions provided in reliable sources. Primary sources such as identifiers assigned by the manufacturer may be helpful.

"Broad Groups"

Broad groups are almost always notable, even if there have been very few actual vehicles produced, such as Electric cars or Supersonic transports. They should, however, be merged whenever practical and should avoid WP:NEOLOGISMs, especially neologisms used solely for marketing purposes. Groups that have yet to produce any functional vehicles, such as Flying cars, are less likely to be notable and should be treated on a case by case basis.

"Types"

A type of vehicle is generally notable if it is verifiably through reliable sources, a distinct "type" as demonstrated by any one or more of the following criteria:

In those situations where the type does not fit the established criteria for notability, it may be better to feature material about it in an article about a closely-related design or (if none exist) about the manufacturer rather than creating a separate article for that aircraft.

"Subtypes" and variants

Articles should not be fragmented, with each split lowering the level of notability. While a type may be notable, it is not normally advisable to have a separate article for subtypes, and it is often the case that despite the parent type being manifestly notable, a derivative article may not be. Exceptions will routinely occur.

A vehicle subtype is not likely to be notable enough for a separate article if it is:

  1. An obvious subtype (Example: the P-51H Mustang)
  2. A licensed or unlicensed copy of another vehicle (Example: the Avia F.39, a licence-built Fokker F.IX, or the Atlas Kudu, an unlicensed copy of the Aermacchi AL.60)
  3. A modification or remanufacture of an existing vehicle (Example: the Conroy Turbo Three, a Douglas DC-3 remanufactured with turboprop engines)
  4. An alternative designation or name for the vehicle for sales or operations in different countries. (Example: the CT-33 Silver Star, the Canadian designation for the T-33 Shooting Star).

The creation of articles on subtypes is almost always for pragmatic reasons. In each of the above examples, a separate article may become practical if the parent article grows to the point where it may be split to a new article, and notability can be demonstrated using the criteria below. This should occur as a top down process - see ((splitsection)), and common sense dictates that the most famous and/or numerically significant subtype(s) should be split off first. Rather than creating separate articles for each subtype of a vehicle, it is common to create a combined article on all variants, treating them in more detail than the summary "Variants" section in the major article about a type (eg. Supermarine Spitfire variants).

Some subtypes are clearly distinct from the immediate parent type and should have their own articles even if the main article does not have to be split. The most obvious case for a "clearly distinct" subtype is when the vehicle is used for a different role, such as the F-15 Eagle and the F-15E Strike Eagle. Other "clearly distinct" subtypes should be readily apparent from available sources that treat the vehicle as distinct, such as the Honda Civic Hybrid.

A subtype may be notable if its parent article requires splitting and it meets any one of the following criteria:

The creation of an article on a sub-subtype should not occur unless a similar process has occurred. (eg. the Messerschmitt Me 262A-1a should not be considered for a separate article until and unless the article on the Messerschmitt Me 262A has grown to the point where a split becomes necessary.

"Individual vehicles"

Almost all individual vehicles are not notable, since in many cases a vehicle is treated in secondary sources as an example of a type. For a distinct article, an individual vehicle should be least one of the following:

"Unique vehicles"

Note that an individual vehicle may be notable as a unique example of a distinct "type" under the criteria set out above. In this case, it is the "type" that is significant, not its notability as an individual vehicle, and this will be considered in the naming of the article.

Other considerations

Special note: advertising and promotion

Advertising is prohibited as an official Wikipedia policy of long standing. Advertising should be removed by following these steps, in order of precedence:

  1. Clean up per Wikipedia:neutral point of view
  2. Delete remaining advertising content from the article
  3. Delete the article, by listing it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion if no notable content remains. However, if an article contains only blatant advertising, with no other useful content, it may be tagged per Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion instead.

It should always weigh against an article's inclusion if the manufacturer or other interested party is the creator of the Wikipedia article. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest for more information.

Future vehicles

Since Wikipedia is not a crystal ball articles about vehicles that have not yet been built are generally discouraged unless reliable sources provide strong evidence about the project's notability. Future vehicles, including those that exist as prototypes but have not entered serial production, may support an article if they have been the subject of academic study or significant industry research and development, and sufficient published reference material exists. (e.g. Atmospheric railway, Chevrolet Volt).

Resources[edit]

Sample encyclopedic works

Authoritative websites

Other useful websites

The following websites display evidence of meticulous research and may be considered generally reliable; however, they are still private websites and should therefore be used with caution and verified against other sources.

Notes[edit]

  1. ^ Wikipedia:Notability (toys and games) may provide guidance for models and toys
  2. ^ In the aviation world, the word "type" has a specialised narrow meaning, namely, an aircraft design that has been issued with a type certificate from a relevant authority. This page follows the more casual usage since it applies to vehicles other than aircraft.
  3. ^ Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) is a more relevant guideline
  4. ^ "Search engine for issued aircraft type designators". International Civil Aviation Organization. Retrieved 2008-07-03.
  5. ^ "subject" means non-trivial treatment and excludes mere mention of the vehicle, but not necessarily the sole or major subject of the work.
  6. ^ "Non-trivial" excludes personal websites, blogs, bulletin boards, Usenet posts, wikis and other media that are not themselves reliable. An analysis of the manner of treatment is crucial as well; Slashdot.org for example is reliable, but postings to that site by members of the public on a subject do not share the site's imprimatur.
  7. ^ Independent does not mean independent of the aviation industry, but only refers to those actually involved with the production, operation, or preservation of this particular vehicle.

See also[edit]

More specific notability essays
General