Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wellesley College Senate bus

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 DavidLeighEllis (talk) 20:45, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wellesley College Senate bus[edit]

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

Non-notable college shuttle service that has not received signifiant coverage outside of the colleges it serves. Claim to fame appears to be a passing mention in a Rolling Stone article. Hirolovesswords (talk) 14:37, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note This article has twice before been nominated for deletion. Both ended up as no consensus.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Fuck_Truck (February 2006) and
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Wellesley_College_Senate_Bus (March 2006)
Please note that Wikipeida's policies and guidelines have evolved a lot since then. - Lentower (talk) 15:35, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as meeting GNG per news and books. As Susan Orlean put it in Saturday Night, "the Wellesley Bus is a revered weekend institution of consequence in the greater Boston metropolitan area." [1]. 24.151.116.25 (talk) 15:30, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:48, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:48, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:48, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Notability may be tenuous, but it's there and it isn't temporary. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 21:07, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per others; I say that from the media coverage the notability does exist. Rcsprinter (warn) @ 21:27, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Enough sources to establish WP:N, including two national and two regional sources. Agree with other "Keep"s. Lentower (talk) 16:28, 6 September 2013 (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.