Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Propulsion system

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 Non-admin procedural close. Article was Deleted by Timotheus Canens per ANI discussion.. Trusilver 07:28, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Propulsion system

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

OR article! Gibberish! References are only here for padding, it looks like. Editor who created this page, User:Marshallsumter is currently banned for disruptive editing. Hundreds of other articles from this editor are being canvassed. Please help! AstroCog (talk) 23:00, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 00:34, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep A mother article with a collection of notable prop. systems. Great as an introduction about the topic for interested readers. Sp33dyphil ^{"Ad astra"} 02:30, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Then it's gonna need significant revision. I debated nominating this one, but it still reads like so much OR.AstroCog (talk) 02:43, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This one I'm going to lean toward keeping. It's a disaster of an article, and it looks vaguely coatrackish, but the subject is valid and, as Sp33dyphil pointed out, is a good introduction to a more complicated topic. Trusilver 14:47, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep; I think this article could benefit from a lot of work but it's notable and the existing content doesn't seem to be misleading or copyvio at first glance. Several of the creators' other articles are up for deletion because they just mash together paragraphs about different things which share a keyword, but in this article that sin might actually be a virtue. bobrayner (talk) 16:17, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete. Too general to be useful: it's about ships, vehicles, spacecraft, birds, insects... Mostly unreferenced, and a copyvio because of WP:CWW (from Ship, Spacecraft propulsion, Vehicle propulsion, etc.) without acknowledging the source. -- 202.124.74.23 (talk) 12:47, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. One of many articles created by a banned user by smashing together bits from other articles. A bot could easily generate tens of thousands of similar articles: indeed, I'm wondering if some of these were created programatically. -- The Anome (talk) 00:44, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This is an absolutely basic encyclopedic topic, as you can see from the articles that link to the topic (I added a few that already existed as unlinked terms). It's clearly verifiable and is good to have as an overview. It needs work, but what doesn't? Steven Walling • talk 03:34, 12 September 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.