| Revision as of 08:30, 27 October 2022 editAjf773 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users22,711 edits redirect← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:40, 30 October 2022 edit undoNotOrrio (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,872 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
| ::I have already stated to you the following on ]. A bus timetable is a reliable and acceptable source for determing what stops the bus route serves, to back it up for there were two sources for this a primary source (PTV) and a secondary Source (Moovit) ]. I know one of the arguments to avoid using in deletion is to not mention other articles but I want to show that stop information used as a source for where the bus serves is the norm for wikipeida bus route pages for example https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=London_Buses_route_1&direction=next&oldid=983282445 uses the source https://tfl.gov.uk/bus/route/1 for the section current route. | ::I have already stated to you the following on ]. A bus timetable is a reliable and acceptable source for determing what stops the bus route serves, to back it up for there were two sources for this a primary source (PTV) and a secondary Source (Moovit) ]. I know one of the arguments to avoid using in deletion is to not mention other articles but I want to show that stop information used as a source for where the bus serves is the norm for wikipeida bus route pages for example https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=London_Buses_route_1&direction=next&oldid=983282445 uses the source https://tfl.gov.uk/bus/route/1 for the section current route. | ||
| * '''Keep''' As there is enough reliable sources to deem this article notable with primary sources backed up with secondary source. People contesting for deletion will continously suggest this article to be deleted regardless of whether there are enough reliable sources or not. ] has consistently made source assesments with minimal research to benefit his push to what he wants to do with the article, most deletion attempts are likely just a case of (]) (]) 1:39, 30 October 2022 (UTC) | |||
| ] (]) 10:09, 24 October 2022 (UTC) | ] (]) 10:09, 24 October 2022 (UTC) | ||
| ::'''Comment''', a bus timetable is perfectly acceptable to use as a source for determing what stops a bus route has however they aren't reliable or acceptable sources to establish the bus routes notability. In respect to the London bus route you have referred to, it is notable because it demonstrates there is significant coverage, not mentions in passing, in multiple independent secondary sources. ] (]) 13:20, 24 October 2022 (UTC) | ::'''Comment''', a bus timetable is perfectly acceptable to use as a source for determing what stops a bus route has however they aren't reliable or acceptable sources to establish the bus routes notability. In respect to the London bus route you have referred to, it is notable because it demonstrates there is significant coverage, not mentions in passing, in multiple independent secondary sources. ] (]) 13:20, 24 October 2022 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 01:40, 30 October 2022
901 (PTV Bus)
New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- How to contribute
- Introduction to deletion process
- Guide to deletion (glossary)
- Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
- 901 (PTV Bus) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This bus route is not the subject of significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources to establish notability. Redirect to Smart Bus#Routes was reverted by article creator with no improvements to show the route is notable. Whpq (talk) 03:00, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
Note: Dan arndt has created a second deletion discussion for this article, at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/901 (PTV Bus) (2nd nomination). I am copying his comment to this discussion, and I shall then delete that duplicate AfD page. JBW (talk) 10:13, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
- Note 2:I created a second deletion discussion only because the article's creator blanked this AfD discussion and removed the header from the article, as a result I was unaware that this AfD existed. Dan arndt (talk) 00:20, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
- Redirect to Smart Bus#Routes. Article fails WP:GNG, lacks significant coverage in multiple independent secondary sources. A bus timetable is not an acceptable source. Department of Transport (Victoria) and Kinetic Melbourne are both primary sources. Dan arndt (talk) 06:34, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Australia. Dan arndt (talk) 06:34, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
- I have already stated to you the following on Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/903 (PTV Bus). A bus timetable is a reliable and acceptable source for determing what stops the bus route serves, to back it up for there were two sources for this a primary source (PTV) and a secondary Source (Moovit) NotOrrio. I know one of the arguments to avoid using in deletion is to not mention other articles but I want to show that stop information used as a source for where the bus serves is the norm for wikipeida bus route pages for example https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=London_Buses_route_1&direction=next&oldid=983282445 uses the source https://tfl.gov.uk/bus/route/1 for the section current route.
- Keep As there is enough reliable sources to deem this article notable with primary sources backed up with secondary source. People contesting for deletion will continously suggest this article to be deleted regardless of whether there are enough reliable sources or not. Whpq has consistently made source assesments with minimal research to benefit his push to what he wants to do with the article, most deletion attempts are likely just a case of (WP:IDONTLIKEIT) (talk) 1:39, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
NotOrrio (talk) 10:09, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
- Comment, a bus timetable is perfectly acceptable to use as a source for determing what stops a bus route has however they aren't reliable or acceptable sources to establish the bus routes notability. In respect to the London bus route you have referred to, it is notable because it demonstrates there is significant coverage, not mentions in passing, in multiple independent secondary sources. Dan arndt (talk) 13:20, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
- Redirect per nom. This is not independently notable, and no amount of bludgeoning, attempting to circumvent AfD, and deception by the article creator will change this. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 14:01, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
- Redirect per nom. Just another run of the mill bus route that doesn't require special treatment with its own article. Ajf773 (talk) 08:30, 27 October 2022 (UTC)