Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Connecticut Transit fleet

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 delete. Michig (talk) 07:08, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Connecticut Transit fleet[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)

Consists entirely of unsourced trivia split off from Connecticut Transit. If unsourced content were removed, no viable standalone article would remain. –dlthewave ☎ 03:29, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Frankly, I find most of these transport rosters to be overly detailed messes. To state that a on agency uses certain models and how many of each if it can be sourced is fine, but all of this trivia is just rivet counting. This is an encyclopedia, not a spotters' guide. (My reversions were simply an objection to process, not content, which I agree is unneeded and trivial.) oknazevad (talk) 03:58, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:43, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Connecticut-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:43, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, Bus WP:FANCRUFT. Ajf773 (talk) 10:05, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, IMO the article could be saved by an editor who wanted to do so, but I have no desire to try given recent events I've had with certain transportation aficionados. At this point it's a total re-write... maybe someone else will rewrite it from scratch without all of the original research. Someday. Markvs88 (talk) 12:15, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As I've stated elsewhere, fleet rosters are often fancruft and serve as an attractive nuisance for unsourced, unencyclopedic edits. I do think it's possible to write about rolling stock and such without losing balance, but it requires good sources. I still think there needs to be a discussion somewhere, at least within WikiProject Trains, about the appropriate level of detail for rosters. Mackensen (talk) 16:47, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete A metro area's transit roster is big enough. Trying to write about the fleet of an entire state which has many unsourced diversions such as 'this bus replaced one that was in a major crash' goes into 'find something else to do' territory that even the transit authority itself would never track in detail. Nate • (chatter) 01:33, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Connecticut Transit can be expanded if needed. Capitals00 (talk) 17:18, 17 December 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.