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 delete. ✗ plicit 23:52, 9 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Hansa Australia

Hansa Australia (  | 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)

Non-notable vehicle ( WP:NVEHICLE) with no secondary sources. Included in Germany sorting because registered owner appears to be a German logistics company - Headphase ( talk) 20:53, 2 January 2022 (UTC) reply

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Headphase ( talk) 20:53, 2 January 2022 (UTC) reply
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Headphase ( talk) 20:53, 2 January 2022 (UTC) reply
• Delete Wow, this article's author has a long history of making non-notable articles that end up deleted. This is such a microstub there's nothing to merge anywhere. I suppose a redirect wouldn't be horrible, but there aren't any valid targets. So that just leaves us with the delete button. I know that "the author's creations suck!" isn't a valid deletion rationale by itself, so I did a basic search and I couldn't find anything providing significant coverage. Trainsandotherthings ( talk) 21:15, 2 January 2022 (UTC) reply
• Delete, I couldn't find sufficient sources to pass WP:GNG. Suonii180 ( talk) 13:42, 9 January 2022 (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.