Deletion of Catalog numbering systems for single records

Comment: Wow, the direction of this AFD is baffling to me. I've never seen so many experienced editors advocate keeping an article without any reliable sources present and without proposing any new usable ones. (at least not since the pre-2010 AFD days.) Yes, AFD is not cleanup, but that doesn't change that nothing beyond anecdotal "" arguments have been given so far in favor of keeping. No one has established how this meets the . "There's potential to improve this" type arguments are only valid when an actual potential path forward is presented - like providing actual reliable sources that could be used. No one has done that, and improvement hasn't happened organically since its inception in 2005
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:ITSNOTABLE||WP:GNG)

Comment: WP:NOTCATALOG. Lots of !keep votes here saying  and  yet no one has provided sources to show how it meets . What am I missing here
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:ITSNOTABLE||WP:ILIKEIT||WP:GNG)

Comment: Keep because it's an incredibly valuable resource.  |IAR because S'73 is right that the sourcing is sub-standard.  Normally, I'm a stickler for sourcing, but normally, somebody's trying to push some private agenda (promotion of a company, political, etc) or there's a question of backing up a .  Nothing like that applies here.  I'd be OK if some other suitable home (i.e. another wiki, with compatible licensing, and sufficient stability/reliability) could be found and we moved it there.  But, lacking that, I'm fine with proudly flying the ''This is what encyclopedias are all about, damn the rules'' banner
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Ignore all rules (WP:IAR||WP:BLP)

Comment: This needs work, yes, but |AfD is not for cleanup. This is an encyclopedic subject, and while it may need to be moved to List of catalog numbering systems for single records to better reflect its content, this is a |notable topic. The main thrust of the delete arguments seems to be "These numbers have no significance to the general reader." - that is not a reason to delete anything, or else we'd have to axe about two-thirds of the encyclopedia
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:NOTCLEANUP||WP:GNG)