Deletion of Loading dock

Comment: The nomination doesn't provide a reason to delete.  It appears that improvement is wanted but that the nominator doesn't know how to do this.  But does that mean it's not possible?  No – consider, for example, the section about loading dock levelers.  This is quite extensive and so might need more work.  It seems easy to find a respectable source which discusses these in detail – ''https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=oHkA15BCY9MC The Warehouse Management Handbook'' or ''https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=1AWDk_kbb0cC Facilities Planning and Design''.  Of course, the work of obtaining, reading, digesting and summarising such sources would be significant and the task is likely to be thankless.  The nomination cites  but that is not policy and the use of high explosives is not appropriate.  Here are more relevant polcies and guidelines
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Blow it up and start over (WP:TNT)

Comment: No proper rationale for deletion. If an article of a notable topic needs improvement, especially if it's been six years, |then fix it!  A quick search brought up the book ''https://www.google.com/books/edition/Technical_Standards_and_Design_Guideline/lm9qDwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22loading+docks%22+standards&pg=PT64&printsec=frontcover Technical Standards and Design Guidelines Mixed - Use Buildings'' which is a great place to start
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Be bold (WP:SOFIXIT)