Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Transportation

Shortcuts

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Transportation. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Transportation|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Transportation. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

Purge page cache

watch

Additional debates categorized as dealing with Transportation related issues may also be listed at Category:AfD debates (Places and transportation).

Transportation

Volitan

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Notability. Can't find anything within the last decade, or describing an actual vessel, rather than a vague concept for sticking solar panels to a boat. Andy Dingley (talk) 19:54, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:56, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Temporary coverage about a design, not a real product ever made. Reywas92^Talk 20:08, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Harrington Subway

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article about a piece of transportation infrastructure, not reliably sourced as having any serious notability claim. Just to be clear, this is a subway in the sense of "single road passing under a graded crossing", not in the sense of "underground metro system", so it isn't automatically notable enough for its own standalone article just because it exists -- millions of roads pass under other roads or railway lines all over the world, so such things are just run of the mill without some kind of historical, social or political context for why they might be more significant than most other underpasses.
But this, as written, just says that the subject is a thing that exists, without providing any context for why its existence might warrant an encyclopedia article about it -- and it cites just one footnote that glancingly namechecks the underpass without being about the underpass in any non-trivial sense, which is not enough coverage to get the underpass over WP:GNG all by itself. Bearcat (talk) 15:53, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Tamil Nadu. Bearcat (talk) 15:53, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete only one source in the article which barely mentions the subway and clearly lacks WP:SIGCOV. SportingFlyer T·C 18:09, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

İAOSB Müdürlüğü (Tram İzmir)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Appears to lack any significant coverage and fails WP:GNG. Note that train stations have no inherent notability (per WP:NTRAINSTATION) and I'm just not seeing anything beyond routine sources. Hey man im josh (talk) 20:36, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Turkey. Hey man im josh (talk) 20:36, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Stations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:43, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect T3 (Tram İzmir) as ATD. The creator made articles for every station and they cannot be WP:BLARED since there already has been a draftification attempt, so might be good to convert this to a batch nom? Jumpytoo Talk 06:13, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jumpytoo: I do intend to nominate the rest of the recent creations as a batch, but I prefer to test the waters first before doing a batch nom that could end up being a WP:TRAINWRECK. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:59, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just curious, why can't they be redirected due to being draftified? - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 20:47, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To clarify I meant BLARED without discussion, since the draftification was opposed they have to go through AfD Jumpytoo Talk 22:21, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm still confused, since drafting isn't redirecting, I'm not seeing why "opposed draftification" means "cannot boldy redirect". - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 02:35, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shuicheng Road station

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not appear to meet WP:GNG and WP:STATION. Source 1 in article is an official system map (primary & not independent) and source 2 appears to be a database that may be user-generated (not reliable). A WP:BEFORE search on Google & Baidu in both English & Chinese did not turn up anything useful. I WP:BLARed this to Line 10 (Shanghai Metro)#Stations last year, but this was reverted by another user in October this year (rewritten but no improvements in terms of notability). I propose that the aforementioned redirect be restored. S5A-0043^Talk 14:44, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Stations, Transportation, and China. Skynxnex (talk) 14:47, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Looking at the adjacent stations it seems they have a similar level of sourcing. Batch nom might be preferable here? Jumpytoo Talk 02:01, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I intend to do this as a trial run before nominating other articles. Last time I jumped ahead in a batch nom I messed up in explaining my case and it kind of backfired so I’m trying to avoid that. S5A-0043^Talk 04:41, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good, redirect to Line 10 (Shanghai Metro) as WP:ATD. I found one source but that is insufficient for GNG: [1]. Jumpytoo Talk 06:09, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Re-redirect >>> Line 10 (Shanghai Metro)#Stations Djflem (talk) 07:24, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Farakka Port

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The existence of this port is questionable due to a serious lack of sources. A Google search yields no results for the so-called "Farakka Port". The cited sources in the article refer instead to a Farakka inland waterway, used for transporting coal to the Farakka Super Thermal Power Station near the Farakka Barrage. It seems it is actually referring to a floating terminal listed here. In any case, the topic fails to meet WP:GNG. The Doom Patrol (talk) 09:01, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation, India, and West Bengal. The Doom Patrol (talk) 09:01, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest merge some supported content to a section in Farakka. - Davidships (talk) 13:49, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - there is not a lot of coverage in English, but it's enough to verify, and combine with significant coverage in Bengali, and it passes GNG. I added another English language source. I've been redirecting and merging a lot of unsourced Indian-related stubs, but this is an easy keep. Bearian (talk) 11:31, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:47, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2009 Aéro-Frêt An-12 crash

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENTCRIT. Per WP:GNG, "sources should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability". From what I've been able to find, none of the sources were secondary in nature since none of them contained analysis, evaluation, interpretation, or synthesis of the event itself. The event does not have significant, in-depth, nor sustained continued coverage with coverage only briefly occurring in the aftermath of the accident. No lasting effects or long-term impacts on a significant region have been demonstrated. WP:EVENTCRIT#4 states that routine kinds of news events including most accidents – whether or not tragic or widely reported at the time – are usually not notable unless something further gives them additional enduring significance, which this event lacks. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 08:11, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Aviation, Transportation, and Democratic Republic of the Congo. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 08:11, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:02, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Think it's enough to keep. Some news, large and well-known kind of aircraft crashing with fatalities. Hyperbolick (talk) 08:42, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Whatever the aircraft type and whether the accident had casualties or not is not an argument based on Wikipedia's notability guidelines. There was news coverage, but that alone is not a reason to keep. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 09:59, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Out of curiosity, @Aviationwikiflight, has a final report for this accident been released yet? if there has it might determine the notability of this accident (uniqueness etc.)

Anyways besides that, my vote as of current is a weak keep, seeing it was an illegal flight on a heavy aircraft makes it somewhat notable as illegal flights (especially on heavy aircraft such as the Antonov An-12) are generally rare and notable, the above will determine a possible sway of my vote. Lolzer3k 15:35, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To my knowledge, no final report has been released (if an investigation was even started). I don’t necessarily see the release of a final report, nor the opposite, as indicative of notability since it should be common practice among investigative agencies to release them. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 15:45, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lolzer3000. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 16:23, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lolzer3000. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 16:49, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:46, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stations

İAOSB Müdürlüğü (Tram İzmir)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Appears to lack any significant coverage and fails WP:GNG. Note that train stations have no inherent notability (per WP:NTRAINSTATION) and I'm just not seeing anything beyond routine sources. Hey man im josh (talk) 20:36, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Turkey. Hey man im josh (talk) 20:36, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Stations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:43, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect T3 (Tram İzmir) as ATD. The creator made articles for every station and they cannot be WP:BLARED since there already has been a draftification attempt, so might be good to convert this to a batch nom? Jumpytoo Talk 06:13, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jumpytoo: I do intend to nominate the rest of the recent creations as a batch, but I prefer to test the waters first before doing a batch nom that could end up being a WP:TRAINWRECK. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:59, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just curious, why can't they be redirected due to being draftified? - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 20:47, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To clarify I meant BLARED without discussion, since the draftification was opposed they have to go through AfD Jumpytoo Talk 22:21, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm still confused, since drafting isn't redirecting, I'm not seeing why "opposed draftification" means "cannot boldy redirect". - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 02:35, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shuicheng Road station

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not appear to meet WP:GNG and WP:STATION. Source 1 in article is an official system map (primary & not independent) and source 2 appears to be a database that may be user-generated (not reliable). A WP:BEFORE search on Google & Baidu in both English & Chinese did not turn up anything useful. I WP:BLARed this to Line 10 (Shanghai Metro)#Stations last year, but this was reverted by another user in October this year (rewritten but no improvements in terms of notability). I propose that the aforementioned redirect be restored. S5A-0043^Talk 14:44, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Stations, Transportation, and China. Skynxnex (talk) 14:47, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Looking at the adjacent stations it seems they have a similar level of sourcing. Batch nom might be preferable here? Jumpytoo Talk 02:01, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I intend to do this as a trial run before nominating other articles. Last time I jumped ahead in a batch nom I messed up in explaining my case and it kind of backfired so I’m trying to avoid that. S5A-0043^Talk 04:41, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good, redirect to Line 10 (Shanghai Metro) as WP:ATD. I found one source but that is insufficient for GNG: [2]. Jumpytoo Talk 06:09, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Re-redirect >>> Line 10 (Shanghai Metro)#Stations Djflem (talk) 07:24, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Transportation Proposed deletions

None at present

Transportation-related Images and media for Deletion

None at present

Transportation-related Miscellany for deletion

None at present

Transportation-related Templates for Deletion

None at present

Transportation-related Categories for Discussion

None at present

Transportation-related Deletion Review

None at present

Transportation-related Redirects for Discussion

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 June 9#First f Great Western