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The result was Nomination withdrawn in view of Eastmain's addition of references to the article that confirm the notability of the subject. Thank you, Eastmain! Ecoleetage (talk) 23:05, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ČD Class 471 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

I am unable to identify the specific notability of this subject. Ecoleetage (talk) 13:05, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Sometimes a locomotive or EMU is better known by its marketing name or nickname than by its class designation. There are several references under its alternative name CityElefant [here. In general, though, I think there is usually enough documentation about classes of locomotives, EMUs, DMUs and rail coaches to consider them automatically notable. -- Eastmain (talk) 15:09, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Subject seems to be sufficiently notable to me. Expansion of coverage of subjects in countries where English is not the primary language (and particularly those lesser known areas) seems to me to be a good thing to try for. TWP notified of AfD. Mjroots (talk) 15:36, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. One of the tremendous benefits of Wikipedia is its coverage of specialist areas such as trains. This article is one of many in the Wiki Trains project, a project which is trying to build up a comprehensive view of the subject, not just in English speaking countries, but elsewhere. Inevitably that means listing lesser known classes alongside the more famous ones. The main problem with this article is not so much notability, but lack of detail and references. However I see it as 'work in progress' as part of the Wiki Trains project. Bermicourt (talk) 22:37, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment -- I just added an external link to this page. Would this help in saving the article from deletion? You could use it to expand the article, and even add it as a possible reference. ----DanTD (talk) 23:19, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Procedural keep to counter systematic bias against topics from outside the English-speaking world and per arguments by Bermicourt. I don't see that lesser known trains (which I know little about anyway) are any less notable than lesser known type of car. This might be a good time to clarify types/classes of transportation vehicles in Wikipedia:Notability (Transportation) while the policy is still a proposal. McWomble (talk) 04:31, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This nomination has absolutely nothing to do with countering systematic bias. The article makes no assertion of notability for the subject, and I have yet to see any !vote where someone has offered a cogent explanation on why the subject is notable or how it falls in line with WP:N. I have no problems withdrawing a nomination if that is proven, but claiming a non-existent anti-Anglophonic sentiment is bizarre. Ecoleetage (talk) 11:27, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. The very first !vote by Eastmain offered a cogent explanation on why the subject is notable and how it falls in line with WP:N by linking to reliable sources. Systemic bias is a completely different concept from anti-Anglophonic sentiment - the meaning of the word "systemic" in that phrase is precisely that the bias is not the result of any sentiment. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:42, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Eastmain. Also, from looking at the stock list of CD, this appears to be the most common EMU of the company, and makes up a significant part of the transportation infrastructure around Prague. Systematic bias is absolutely a concern here, considering that every EMU, DMU, locomotive and carriage type of Amtrak and the British railways have articles. There is no reason to call the Czech counterparts less notable. Sjakkalle (Check!) 11:34, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:42, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep -- Articles of callses of vehicle (including locos) are useful. Those on individual ones (unless exceptionally notable) are not. HOwever this is only a stub. Peterkingiron (talk) 19:05, 8 November 2008 (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.