Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GE U25BE

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 merge‎ to GE U25B. (non-admin closure) NotAGenious (talk) 11:54, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GE U25BE

[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)

This appears to have been WP:REFBOMBed to make it appear more notable than it is. By my analysis most of the citations are in regards to Southern Pacific 3100 specifically and not GE U25BE and even then 3100 is only touched on in passing. The citations that do cover GE U25BE specifically do so in passing as far as I can determine. I can not see how this passes WP:GNG. TarnishedPath^talk 07:45, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology and Transportation. TarnishedPath^talk 07:45, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: It's another example of Rebuilt diesel locomotives besides its completely new y'know. 220.235.238.29 (talk) 07:47, 16 November 2023 (UTC) — 220.235.238.29 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Redirect to GE U25B - clear redirect target as AtD. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 08:21, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to GE U25B.

I'm not against separate articles for rebuilt locos, British Railways class 31 for an example, where we ignore a decade of service by the predecessor class 30, but they'd have to show independent notability. Otherwise a section in the parent article is a better solution, and a clearer read for our readers. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:30, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to GE U25B. I fail to see how a rebuild that "updated electrical systems" on two locomotives somehow merits its own article. In general, rebuilds are not generally notable the way regular locomotive classes are. There needs to be clear and substantial coverage independent of the original locomotive class for that, and we completely lack that here in favor of every single hit this IP found on Google, with sources they obviously did not actually access. For instance, the seemingly significant "GE and EMD Locomotives: The Illustrated History" actually only mentions the U25BE in passing, saying nothing of significance. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 21:48, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've also nominated Southern Pacific 3100 at AfD.TarnishedPath^talk 01:04, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per nom. No evidence of individual notability. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 02:39, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge There were two made, and the rebuild was not very noteworthy. Merging it into the main article is the best option. BigSneeze444 (talk) 20:13, 21 November 2023 (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.