Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of through trains in Japan

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 Userfy. There is clear consensus that this doesn't belong in the main article space in its current form, but as User:Northamerica1000 seems eager to work on it, I'll userfy it -- RoySmith (talk) 03:28, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

List of through trains in Japan[edit]

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

PROD declined. Useless stub with no actual list of trains. Safiel (talk) 00:17, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Move to WP:Drafts namespace.Martin451 00:35, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transport-related deletion discussions. Martin451 00:53, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. Martin451 00:53, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete. Tagged as "CSD A3" - No content. --DAJF (talk) 01:07, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I have declined the speedy deletion nomination on the page, and have expanded the article. Northamerica1000^(talk) 07:58, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Move to WP:Drafts namespace or userfy until it can be worked on with reliable sourcing sufficient to demonstrate the basic notability for a Wikipedia article. At present, the article is titled "List of through trains", but consists of an arbitrary list of lines. --DAJF (talk) 09:19, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

delete Wikipedia is not a train schedule, and this can be expected to change as schedules change. Mangoe (talk) 01:24, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. The corresponding Japanese article https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%9B%B4%E9%80%9A%E9%81%8B%E8%BB%A2 has lots of references. A complete translation of the Japanese article would probably establish notability. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 02:52, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it has no references at all. Those are all footnotes. Mangoe (talk) 02:55, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

~~Move to WP:Drafts namespace and~~ allow time for expansion per the availability of content at The Japanese Wikipedia article. Another option is to retain the article, which I have begun to improve and add content to. Northamerica1000^(talk) 07:36, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per improvements I've performed, and the article remains quite expandable. I'm also not opposed to moving it to Draft namespace. Northamerica1000^(talk) 08:18, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete, What list??.....There isn't one/any!. →Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 07:38, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I have expanded the article. Northamerica1000^(talk) 07:51, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, I wasn't expecting anyone to expand the article at all .. *face palm*, Now it has IMO I see no reason to delete. →Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 08:12, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I did the first PROD, which the creator of the stub simply removed and ignored and added a category (how gracious) but nothing else, as I have had issue with atrocious starts by the same editor 3 and 4 years ago (ie ignoring usage of WP:RS requirements etc, still on the users unarchived talk page), however Northamericas adding material is hardly anything to write home about, still a marginal article in the current state, due to the lack of WP:RS - to substantiate the claims of the text since added - leave this still a candidate for deletion satusuro 09:14, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NOTDIR and WP:NOTTRAVEL. Wikipedia is not a train or travel guide.--Charles (talk) 09:32, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:52, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 23:29, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Northamerica1000^(talk) 19:06, 25 January 2014 (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.