Deletion of Landspeeder

Comment: It seems quite likely that the landspeeder is known to most households and there's certainly a https://www.lego.com/en-gb/product/luke-skywalker-s-landspeeder-75271 LEGO model, just like the Deathstar and Star Destroyer.  The nomination is just some vague ideas about |cleanup while the claims that there's no coverage are false, as usual.  For example, ''https://scholar.google.com/scholar?start=30&q=landspeeder&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5 Perspectives: Sounds of Cinema: What Do We Really Hear?'' explains that the sound effect was devised as "''cars on the Los Angeles Harbor freeway heard through a vacuum cleaner pipe''" which "''reflects its owner's youth by producing high-pitched frequencies that match the characteristics of his voice''".  Insofar as the nomination recommends an |alternative to deletion, it is not appropriate here
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:NOTCLEANUP||WP:ATD)

Comment: Fancruft. Fails  when looking at RS
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: meets , in addition to sources provided previously in this afd, covered in numerous books that are held by muliple libraries ie. https://www.worldcat.org/title/star-wars-complete-vehicles/oclc/841483974&referer=brief_results ''Star Wars: Complete Vehicles'', https://www.worldcat.org/title/moviemaking-magic-of-star-wars-ships-battles/oclc/1122880505&referer=brief_results ''The Moviemaking Magic of Star Wars. Ships + Battles'', https://www.worldcat.org/title/learn-how-to-draw-star-wars-droids-vehicles/oclc/1029447415&referer=brief_results ''Learn How To Draw Star Wars: Droids & Vehicles'', https://www.worldcat.org/title/star-wars-the-essential-guide-to-vehicles-and-vessels/oclc/33442820&referer=brief_results ''Star Wars: The Essential Guide To Vehicles and Vessels'', https://www.worldcat.org/title/star-wars-encyclopedia-of-starfighters-and-other-vehicles/oclc/1042561606&referer=brief_results ''Star Wars Encyclopedia Of Starfighters and Other Vehicles'', https://www.worldcat.org/title/star-wars-complete-cross-sections/oclc/86084085&referer=brief_results ''Star Wars: Complete Cross-sections'', https://www.worldcat.org/title/star-wars-the-new-essential-guide-to-vehicles-and-vessels/oclc/1011620876&referer=brief_results ''Star Wars: The New Essential Guide To Vehicles and Vvessels'', examples of them have been included in group exhibitions ie. Powerhouse Museum -https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/lcdocs/submissions/62612/0142i%20Ms%20Jennifer%20Sanders.pdf Star Wars: where science meets imagination (p. 43, and Barbican Centre - https://www.theguardian.com/film/2000/apr/12/starwars ''The Darth Arts
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Current sources shows 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: per discussion above. Subject article includes secondary references which meet . Enough information included which show it meets  too
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SIGCOV||WP:GNG)

Comment: The existence of a LEGO version of a toy or a few passing comments about how its sound was designed is nowhere close to what  requires. The above comments are not grounded in any recognizable policy outside violating stuff such as  or / in general. How Piotrus can survive this toxic fans-vs-Wikipedia environment, I don't understand
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:IDONTLIKEIT||WP:NPA||WP:AGF)

Comment: Besides the sources brought up by other editors, my  reveal reviews of the vehicle in toy form as well as multiple articles covering homemade recreations of the vehicle. The nominator has again made misleading representations about Wikipedia guidelines and policy; an essay authored by individual Wikipedia editors was presented as a "requirement", and has an editing pattern of misusing AfD to discuss potential merge targets for the nominated articles. |Subjective opinions about the topic's notability were made as opposed to a proper source by source analysis found in the article as well as elsewhere on Google, so there is in fact no clear argument for the article to be deleted outright. The nature of this kind of rationale is considered inappropriate per global consensus by other Wikipedia editors, the discussion should be closed on a procedural basis, and any discussions about mergers or redirect targets should be made on the article's talk page
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE||WP:UNKNOWNHERE)

Comment: Toys based on a fictional concept are a real-world effect of said concept. As long as these toys don't have separate articles, they should be considered as a sub-topic of the concept which inspired them. If there are secondary sources discussing such toys, they should be included when considering if  is fullfilled. In this case, I think there is enough coverage in secondary sources when taking together sources about the prop in the films and the toys (and I assume there's also plot-summary information for the land-speeder as it is in-universe), there is enough to keep this article
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)