Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Deutsche Bahn subsidiaries

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 Draftified by creator while discussion was in process. Redirect since deleted, article is currently at Draft:List of Deutsche Bahn subsidiaries. Star Mississippi 01:54, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

List of Deutsche Bahn subsidiaries

[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)

I would have just merged this to Deutsche_Bahn#Company_profile, but creator has already moved the article back from draft space, so imagine this would be controversial and therefore we're here for discussion. There is no evidence that there's a need for this spin out article which has relatively no content or sourcing. It can be spun out when/if there's a need for a list of notable subsidiaries. Its existence on de.wiki is not a reason for a parallel article here since notability standards are different. Star Mississippi 16:11, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Star Mississippi 16:11, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Star Mississippi 16:11, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Star Mississippi 16:11, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I stick with my recommendation that now refers to h

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Star Mississippi 16:59, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Star Mississippi 16:59, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: @Star Mississippi "Its existence on de.wiki is not a reason for a parallel article here since notability standards are different." That's true, but I think it is irrelevant here.

Quoting WP:LISTN, "Lists that fulfill recognized informational, navigation, or development purposes often are kept regardless of any demonstrated notability." The German article lists more than 500 individual companies. I wanted to recreate that article in English for navigation purposes. That list would be way too long to include in the Deutsche Bahn article. In its current state it is possible to merge, but then it would need to be splitted again when the article gets extended. So I'm voting for keep. I would prefer draftifying over merging. PhotographyEdits (talk) 14:23, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Then why did you revert the draftification? That is the perfect solution Star Mississippi 14:53, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Star Mississippi Because I think that the Wikipedia policy does currently allows it existence, even with the small amount of links it contains at the moment. PhotographyEdits (talk) 15:13, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It allows its existence if it's needed. There's no evidence that the moment that it is, or sources to justify it as a standaline. It can just as easily be incubated in the article before being spun out when and if it's needed. At the moment, this list serves zero purpose to help out readers. I'd also note that much of the sourcing on de wiki would likely not work here as it does not appear to be independent or in depth Star Mississippi 17:47, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Star Mississippi Okay, well, let's move it back to drafts then. PhotographyEdits (talk) 14:42, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and redirect. It's a short list that does more damage than good for WP at this time. Nom nailed it. gidonb (talk) 02:40, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment creator has moved it back to draft space during this discussion. I am unclear as to process on whether it should continue, so am leaving it open, but have no objection to closure should that be what someone decides. Star Mississippi 18:46, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. My recommendation still holds! It now refers to the redirect to the draft. A draft reviewer should decide on the fate of the draft. gidonb (talk) 23:28, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Liz has deleted the redirect. I guess with Gidonb's confirmation that their recommendation holds, this isn't an involved close. Star Mississippi 01:53, 8 August 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.