Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pence-Cole Valley Transit Center

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 no consensus. Closing. Feel free to renominate if appropriate. (non-admin closure) Nightfury 09:18, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pence-Cole Valley Transit Center

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

Bus station with very few passengers and few non-Spokane references. Contested PROD. Sounder Bruce 22:30, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Opposed: List of transit exchanges in Metro Vancouver links to transit centers of lesser size than this transit center, so I'm not sure why this transit center would not be considered notable. Also, this transit center has been proposed to be a light rail stop in the past (similar to how many bus transit centers in the Puget Sound region are being upgraded to light rail stops with Link's expansion. Should Spokane ever get light rail, it is likely that this would become a light rail stop.Jdubman (talk) 06:36, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just because WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, it doesn't make small transit centers like this notable. Spokane is not a major city where its transit stations (which get less than 5,000 daily passengers) can pass general notability. A scrapped light rail plan doesn't make this one station notable; wait until there is a firm plan and the preferred alternative includes this station before trying to use light rail to assert its notability. Sounder Bruce 07:17, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Discuss 04:22, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Discuss 04:22, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Discuss 04:22, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Question - Is there a guideline on number of passengers that makes a transportation facility notable or not? ~Kvng (talk) 14:59, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 02:30, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - That is a great question regarding whether a guideline exists on number of passengers making a transit hub notable or not. In my opinion, I don't think the lone qualifier should be passenger numbers. There are numerous transit stops (including light rail stops) in the United States that have Wikipedia articles (seemingly on the sole basis that they are a light rail stop) that have lower passenger numbers than this transit hub in question. This is not meant to be a WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument, but rather, an argument that there should be multiple criteria that weighs into whether a transit hub is notable or not. Jdubman (talk) 06:12, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Regarding notability, WP:BUSOUTCOMES mentions articles that describe historically large social impact may be considered notable. I've just expanded the history section of the transit center. The transit center was a cornerstone of major transit expansion in the Spokane area. STA's predecessor, Spokane Transit System, was city owned. Therefore, routes extending outside of city limits (such as into Spokane Valley) were few and far between and were on the chopping block. This transit center was a major component of the transition to a county-wide system that enabled transit development outside of Spokane city limits. Jdubman (talk) 07:09, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- The social impacts described aren't unique at all (literally every other bus route on earth can be described with similar impacts on distance traveled). Much of the new content belongs in the STA system article; we are an encyclopedia after all, one that doesn't need to explain that much background repetitively. Sounder Bruce 08:12, 27 February 2018 (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.