Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Neue Schenke

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 keep‎. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:53, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Neue Schenke

[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)

Notability issues. Citadeol (talk) 10:51, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Germany. Hey man im josh (talk) 11:44, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What are the notability issues? I see three references cited. Garuda3 (talk) 11:57, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Revenge and Harassment by Citadeol user. Lectonar (talk) 13:35, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non-notable point on a railway map. Nothing historical happened here, there is no preserved station building, nothing that would contribute to GNG. Oaktree b (talk) 13:37, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:IINFO; does not seem to be particularly notable as a train station. Not every trans station is automatically notable, and this one does not appear to be the subject of substantial source texts. --Jayron 32 13:45, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The article can be expanded from the corresponding article in the German Wikipedia. The station building still exists, although it has been sold and is no longer part of the railway. A hundred-year-old train station is likely to have been the subject of lots of media coverage over the years. Perhaps someone with online access to old German newspapers through their school or employer could find some more references. Also, I added an infobox, which should make the article more accessible. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 19:32, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Coverage sufficient to meet WP:GNG. No viable reason put forward for deletion other than a two-word opinion. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:08, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It deserves a page due to its historical, geographical, and cultural significance. This stop also plays a crucial role in local transportation. I've augmented the page with new facts and credible sources to boost its relevance on Wikipedia. Moreover, plans are underway to modernize and rebuild the stop in the upcoming years, proving its importance is not diminishing. --BoraVoro (talk) 08:30, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed,Rosguill ^talk 02:10, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Easily meets GNG. SportingFlyer T·C 22:46, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, more than enough here to warrant an article Garuda3 (talk) 07:19, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The article needs some cleanup (and a move, it should be at Neue Schenke station), but it's an active heavy rail station of long standing. Mackensen (talk) 11:49, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep meets WP:GNG. The person who loves reading (talk) 17:38, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The article has been improved and additional references added since the AfD nomination to now pass the GNG criteria. Rupples (talk) 04:24, 13 June 2023 (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.