Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Route 902, Victorian Bus Route

This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2022 October 29.
For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review.

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 redirect to SmartBus#Routes. Closing this early as the page creator has tagged it was CSD G7. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:25, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Route 902, Victorian Bus Route[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)

Fails WP:GNG, requires significant coverage in multiple independent secondary sources. A bus timetable is not an acceptable source. Department of Transport (Victoria) is a primary source. PROD notice was removed without addressing issue so soft delete is not an option. Dan arndt (talk) 11:11, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Australia. Dan arndt (talk) 11:11, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I do not see why adding more sources wasn't considerd before the deletetion request. Deleting an article for not having sources shouldn't be the first option. The first option should be to add more avaliable sources to the existing article. NotOrrio (talk) 12:07, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

during this time i also believe its best to postpone the deletion until the end of this discussion for atleast a week to we can figure out what is best needed for this page NotOrrio (talk) 12:15, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@NotOrrio: which is the rationale for issuing a PROD notice, which allows editors the opportunity to address the issues of notability. The PROD notice was removed within hours without any improvements made to the article.Dan arndt (talk) 12:19, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to SmartBus#Routes. I was unable to find any coverage that would establish this route should be a separate article. -- Whpq (talk) 12:25, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
as a part of making more wikipedia contributions to buses such as Wikipedia:WikiProject Buses bus routes will be given more detailed information on wikipedia that would simply not fit into a section of an article in addition another part of it was to give special bus routes their own article and since 902 has smartbus status (premiuim bus status in victoria) I believe it will need it's own article NotOrrio (talk) 13:19, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You can show that this should be in its own article by providing significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources to establish notability. -- Whpq (talk) 13:24, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to SmartBus#Routes per above. Not every bus route merits its own article, and the article creator's arguments here are very flawed and mostly WP:ILIKEIT. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 15:18, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Suggest speedy close as redirect Note that the article creator has now converted it to a redirect, with comment "i have made the choice to delete this page keeping it up just isnt worth it anymore". PamD 06:45, 21 October 2022 (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.