Deletion of Agha Waqar's Water Fuelled Car

Comment: While this has certainly gathered attention from numerous reliable sources (NYT, Times of India, the local news radio station in my area), there have been many such claims before, and there will be many such claims in the future -- most of, if not all, of these claims will likely be just as fraudulent and ignorant of science as this one. (As hard as I'm trying to be objective and neutral here, as a scientist I just can't help myself...) However, the "event" has received an admittedly unusual amount of coverage in the mainstream Pakistani media, which might overcome any hurdles to . There is already a precedent for a separate article (See: Stanley Meyer's water fuel cell; if it can be shown that this topic is as notable as the aforementioned one or if coverage continues, I would be in favor of a weak keep. Another good course of action is to merge the most important bits of this article into the main article for Water-fuelled car, since, as other editors have already stated, this may be yet another failure of the |Ten Year Test
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:10YT)

Comment: Whether or not this invention works is not a valid criteria for determining whether it is |notable.  The only issue here is whether or not this topic has received significant coverage by secondary |reliable sources.  No offense to Steve who does great work on Wikipedia, this nomination sounds a lot like  to me
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:RS||WP:IDONTLIKEIT)

Comment: Most of the references in the article aren't about the specific Agha Waqar water fuelled car but in generality: it's also doubtful whether this is anything more than news coverage on a slow news day. Wikipedia is not a 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NEWSPAPER)

Comment: per . Then discuss on talk pages about a possible merge to Water-fuelled car. Outright deletion of the entire page doesn't benefit the encyclopedia whatsoever. Rather than requesting for a Wikipedia administrator to delete the article entirely, perhaps consider a merge. Also, the nomination reads very subjectively, without any analysis of the actual coverage in |reliable sources
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Editing policy (WP:PRESERVE||WP:RS)