Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Community Transit bus routes

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Going with the WP:NOTTRAVEL/WP:NOTDIR and WP:NLIST argument with this one. Missvain (talk) 16:47, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

List of Community Transit bus routes[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Wikipedia is not a local bus travel guide. No indication anywhere that these bus routes are notable. Ajf773 (talk) 09:50, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Ajf773 (talk) 09:50, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Ajf773 (talk) 09:50, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. Ajf773 (talk) 09:50, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This is a list of bus routes serving part of a major U.S. metropolitan area. It does not violate WP:NOTTRAVEL since a description of whether the route runs on weekends does not make Wikipedia a travel guide, nor is a description of these routes' termini (however, the notation under the "Route 115" row to "use route 116" on Sundays is not encyclopedic). These descriptions are defining traits of the bus routes, not a "travel guide". Furthermore, the nominator says there is "no indication anywhere that these bus routes are notable". This is false, since there are at least two bus routes with articles listed on that very page, both of which are substantial articles with many reliable secondary sources. Further, I have found several hundred news articles for Community Transit routes, and there may well be more news articles and other secondary sources on other databases. Epicgenius (talk) 14:14, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If anyone needs to know if buses run on weekend, they should obtain the up to date timetable instead of going to Wikipeida. Also the two bus routes with articles are BRT services, which are entirely different to the other routes. Ajf773 (talk) 08:47, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, per above. AlgaeGraphix (talk) 03:48, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Community Transit is the notable subject, not the list of routes. All significantly covered routes should be incorporated into that main article. Nweil (talk) 05:36, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep Some bus routes in this list would be notable enough for their own standalone entries (and two already do), which makes the list fairly useful. As is the explanation of the route numbering system, which would clog up the main article (which is already in need of splitting to maintain readable size). Sounder Bruce 06:18, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep could use more references, not deletion. Works in conjunction with its parent article. Again, the nominator seems motivated against bus route list articles in general. Julius177 (talk) 14:21, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not really seeing a policy based reason there. Ajf773 (talk) 09:05, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Please see deletion discussion here. The nominator is on a crusade of bad-faith WP:IDL deletion nominations, each lacking policy-based arguments, lacking even a shred of prior discussion over whether the list articles in general have merit, and taking the offense against each keep voter's arguments. $ɱ$ (talk) 03:16, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This user is the author of that article which is also up for AfD. It's not bad faith, not even in the slightest. And I've clearly laid out the policy related points that makes the article worthy of discussion for deletion, as is this article too. Ajf773 (talk) 09:18, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per WP:NOTTRAVEL. There is no information within this article that would not be found on a bus schedule. The "Keep" arguments are really weak.--Rusf10 (talk) 22:36, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - fails WP:NLIST since independent sources don't seem to discuss this list as an entity. A list is only notable if it's at least found in sources not associated with the agency. I also find the WP:NOTTRAVEL/WP:NOTDIR argument convincing: the content unsurprisingly reads more like something from the agency's website than anything else. Most of the keep arguments seem to be more "I like it" and ad hominem than anything else, so I don't find them particularly persuasive. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 18:24, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.