Tesla house (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not appear to be an official prototype (vs Cybercab) or proposed product other than appearance at a couple random shows. Not significant coverage to support notability on its own. Could just be mention in Tesla Energy. ZimZalaBim talk 18:31, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep

This prototype/concept has been shown in numerous Australia cities and at two LA Auto Show. Wikipedia has many pages of prototype/concept products. Wikipedia does not exclude prototypes, upcoming products if they are noteworthy. This is noteworthy prototype, not from some small un-noteworthy company.

If you deleted this page you need to remove other prototype/concept pages (go remove these first):

and more. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Telecineguy (talk • contribs)

Note that WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS isn't a very convincing arguement. Need to show the merits of this particular subject and whether it meets WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. --ZimZalaBim talk 18:02, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I'm not seeing a clear GNG pass - the sources are all promotional or are about a different house. (I actually thought this was going to be an ill advised AfD about the house in Smiljan.) SportingFlyer T·C 02:30, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GrabUp - Talk 19:17, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete The sources listed in the article are promotional. The recently added source from "gatorrated" is an unreliable blog post with what appears to be an AI generated image that only exists on the blog. I am not seeing any developments on the tesla house since ~2018.
  • Agree with Zala that WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a convincing argument to keep. Many of the articles listed by telecineguy are well-sourced and establish the notability of their subjects with independent, non-promotional material (e.g. City of Everett (aircraft)) not to mention many led to actual products.

Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 21:32, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep WikiHouse is not a product, why are you not marking it "Delete"? This is not a AI generated image. It was shown at two LA auto shows and in many Australia cities.Telecine Guy (talk) 17:13, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

so, I did a strikethrough on your duplicitous "Keep" since you already have that above. --ZimZalaBim talk 19:55, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There are some calls to merge the article, but I don't think there's enough input to see a consensus for that.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 08:14, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Has anyone been able to find articles that show notability? The brief time period where tesla showed off a prototype (summer/fall 2017) has quite a few in reliable sources, but most just say the tiny house was on tour and maybe give a brief description of the Tesla products included (Tesla solar Tesla battery Tesla model X Tesla electronics etc.). This just seems like tesla was promoting their available products, not truly developing a tiny home for production. There is not much in the way of continued coverage, and more recent articles tend to point back to events 2017.
Politifact covered recent social media posts claiming that Elon Musk was building a low cost house and stated there is not evidence and that the 2017 house was "only a model." Sticking with my earlier vote.
From what I've seen, I'd argue this was more of an event than a true prototype. Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 23:24, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No tags for this post.