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) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sunday drive (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Non-notable neologism. Cites google books exclusively for sources. Note: The link to this article in {{tourism}} was added by this article's creator. —LedgendGamer 22:09, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• DeleteNeutral per neologism. It is probably fiction as well, since it is linking to google's books. ZooFari 22:11, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Changed to neutral, since there were some changes prior to my delete. ZooFari 00:19, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: what issues would have to be addressed in order to change this neutral to a keep? --ClickRick (talk) 08:01, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'm not completely satisfied, especially since the references provided are not completely relevant. The references make "Sunday drive" look like it is just a term. Maybe rewriting the lead would be better suited. ZooFari 15:09, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Desribes an age-old concept and tradition, not a neologism (meaning the phrase). Plenty of references available. Books are considered reliable sources. Sebwite (talk) 22:29, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep.
  • Just because google books is the source of the reference doesn't per se mean that the reference is not reliable or verifiable. I've turned one into a genuine book reference already, and the others may well follow suit.
  • The first google books reference (the one I followed through) turns out to be a book published in 2002 entitled "The 1930s". This suggests that the term is not a neologism. Plus I remember the term from many years ago.
  • http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/drive includes the term.
  • The page is new - the author should at least be given a chance to flesh it out.
• --ClickRick (talk) 22:42, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep but ONLY if substantially fleshed out, otherwise transwiki. Term is known and in widespread use. Eddie.willers (talk) 23:27, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. More suited to a dictionary entry than an encyclopedia article. WP:NAD Niteshift36 (talk) 23:48, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: A dictionary entry is something that says blank is blank with no other content and no possible chance of expansion. This article may be short, but it is more than that. Sebwite (talk) 00:17, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep - I can look for more sources later (time is not on my side), but even it's current state, I say keep. It has adequate sources, but could certainly use more. Lәo_(βǃʘʘɱ) 00:19, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - please read WP:BEFORE and talk to your mother; this is not a neologism but a cliche. Bearian (talk) 00:54, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• It's perhaps more commonly documented under the names "Sunday driving" and "Sunday drivers", and you'll find that there's a lot more in one of the sources already cited for expanding upon this subject. McCrossen devotes the entirety of chapter 4 ("The Sunday Drive") to it. It doesn't just cover automobiles, and the phenomenon dates back to the 19th century. Apparently, at least from how it's cited in other sources, ISBN 9780719055065 has things to say on this subject, too. Uncle G (talk) 16:08, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, I chipped in a couple sentences and more rescue work would be nice toward, say, B-class. Nom has hardly used the ordinary meanings of either "non-notable" or "neologism" and apparently thinks that Google Books are not reliable sources, without supplying evidence, and that the article creator's linking in from a template is significant. Also article youth commends keeping; would like to see the 19th-century sources. Affirm everything Sebwite says too. In short, this is exactly such a topic as should appear in a list of what Wikipedia IS. JJB 05:45, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
• Keep. I believe this traces back to the earliest days of the invention of the automobile and Ford's Model T - Ford created a massive publicity machine in Detroit to ensure every newspaper carried stories and ads about the new product. Ford's network of local dealers made the car ubiquitous in virtually every city in North America. As independent dealers, the franchises grew rich and publicized not just the Ford but the very concept of automobiling; local motor clubs sprang up to help new drivers and to explore the countryside. There is a boutiful supply of reliable sources and a good article can certainly be built here. -- Banjeboi 07:41, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep This a tradition from a time when cars were new, a middle class with leisure time was growing, and suburban development had not destroyed anywhere to drive to. Static Universe ^talk|edits 02:36, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I can remember Sunday drives and I'm not the oldest person here. :-) Borock (talk) 04:38, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I suppose some of the younger generations never heard of a such a thing. Obviously the article subject is notable, and you should have no trouble finding hordes of places where it is mentioned at. Dream Focus 18:32, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per the nominator 71.3.53.121 (talk) 15:17, 10 June 2009 (UTC)^{User:71.3.53.121 made 19 WP:JUSTAVOTE and WP:JNN AfD recommendations in less than 30 minutes after being templated as a single-purpose account on WP:Articles for deletion/Chain smoking — Rankiri (talk) 16:11, 10 June 2009 (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.