Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/String transport

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. (non-admin closure) Szzuk (talk) 18:27, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

String transport

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Insufficient independent RS coverage to establish notability; does not meet GNG. Concept has not progressed beyond the prototype/test stage since the 1980s and fraud concerns have been raised by authorities. –dlthewave ☎ 20:57, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:15, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete - Article is a total Hoax, see CSD#G3. Sheldybett (talk) 02:11, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- I've declined the speedy delete request. The article itself is not a hoax and there really does seem to be such a project, although it's not getting very far given how long it's been around. It is true that there are official warnings from Lithuania and Belgium against investing in it due to illegal investment activities in those countries with a strong suspicion of a Ponzi scheme at play, but that is not the same as a hoax article. The scams themselves may have become notorious enough to become notable. It may be that the focus of the article should shift to the financial irregularities rather than the technical proposal. I have made a start at that by creating a section for it. SpinningSpark 19:08, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There does seem to be coverage of the scheme in reliable sources presented in the article, particularly the official warnings. It looks to me like there is a theoretical basis for the scheme on which the scams are based, and which has received some independent investigation, but the scams are probably the more notable. The article should probably be restructured on that basis, but that's not a reason for deletion. Thryduulf (talk) 12:00, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. String transport has been featured on television in the news and other formats in several countries, including Vietnam (news segment), Netherlands (news segment), Belarus (news segment), Russia (documentary) Australia (news segment), Crimea (televised discussion), Japan (news segment), Italy (news segment), Oman (news segment), Slovenia (news segment), Singapore (news segment), and the UAE (expo commercial "cameo").^talk2siNkarma86—Expert Sectioneer of Wikipedia 17:58, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There is also a 7 hour 45 minute live stream of SkyWay EcoFest 2018 attended by over 5,000 members available in Russian and English versions. There are many examples in the live stream of people riding inside Sky Way vehicles. This makes it very clear that the scheme is not "using money of new investors to pay old investors". The money of all investors goes towards to: 1) the technology, 2) those who market the technology to potential customers, 3) partners (including investors) who help attract investments to the company. And yes, most of these partners invested before they attract other investors - it's only logical that those who attract new people to the company usually participate ahead of time. Commissions do not exceed what is invested even though the commissions are concentrated towards the highest producers, like a pyramid, due to the level structure. This is because the commissions are a percentage of the total invested, never exceeding 100%. Reportedly the company itself sees about half of the investments, about $50 million out of $100 million thus far, so about 50%. How else would Sky Way pay to develop and implement innovative transport? The majority of value is not in the commissions but in the transportation services being developed. This is what investors are getting in return: ownership of capital.^talk2siNkarma86—Expert Sectioneer of Wikipedia 18:21, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You sound like you have a horse in the race. SpinningSpark 18:53, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I always sound like I have a horse in the race. I also defended Talk:Brilliant Light Power and Talk:SkyTran even though I cannot invest in them. For the record, I do not participate in the commission scheme of SkyWay because I am not a "marketing person". I am a pro-technology advocate who will invest where I can.
A long time ago as a child I watched Tortoise Beats Hare and I really, really hated how it ended. Why? Because, deep down, I despise false witness testimony.^talk2siNkarma86—Expert Sectioneer of Wikipedia 19:10, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:00, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jovanmilic97 (talk) 13:12, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The company may be a hoax, but that doesn't matter. It has clearly received "significant coverage" as demonstrated by the sources cited in the article, and as such is notable. FOARP (talk) 15:21, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Concept seems to have received significant coverage, satisfying WP:GNG. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 18:43, 14 November 2018 (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.