Deletion of Inverted Coaster (B&M model)

Comment: More than half the information in this page is already covered in Inverted roller coaster. If the SLC page is any indication there won't be enough secondary sources to allow this page to stand on its own. Delete or merge the Suspended Looping Coaster also. Although I hate to see all that work undone, every single source points back to RCDB.com. These pages lack the |secondary sources and |notability to stand on their own
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SECONDARY||WP:N)

Comment: to Inverted roller coaster. I think the editor's |content forking of Bolliger & Mabillard articles as a whole are somewhat counterproductive, as in the case of this article, but information specifically about this type of model can suffice in the larger space for the roller coaster content so long as it's properly cited
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Content forking (WP:CFORK)

Comment: u|Isaacwshearer}} are you familiar with the concept of |notability? The article currently has no sources apart from the website of its manufacturer, which is obviously not independent and so cannot contribute to notability. To convince people that this article should be retained, we will need to establish that the subject passes the |general notability guideline - in other words, we'll need to find multiple sources which discuss it in depth, and which are |independent, |reliable and |secondary. I know approximately zero about roller coasters, but they seem to be an area of interest for you - if you can identify suitable sources and mention them here, you might be able to persuade people than an article is warranted
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:GNG||WP:INDEPENDENT||WP:RS||WP:SECONDARY)