Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kelvin Central Buses

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 speedy keep. Withdrawn - Sources have been added to the article which I'm more than happy with, Thanks Thistle202 & 94.119.64.17 for adding these to the article your help is very much appreciated :), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 12:02, 20 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kelvin Central Buses[edit]

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

Non notable bus company, This sort of info ideally belongs in a book, Obviously it being a 1989-1998 company there's going to be nothing on Google News however there are a few books on Google Books however these seem to be all just one lined mentions, There may well be sources offline but that would be a wild guess, Fails NCORP and GNG, –Davey2010^Talk 01:34, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:21, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:21, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:21, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- unsourced original research. We should expect better from articles in mainspace. I'm not able to find sources sufficient for an encyclopedia entry, some notes about minor labour disputes and mentions in travel guides, which is not enough. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:24, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – Below is an entire book about the topic. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:26, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

Devoy, D. (2016). Kelvin Central Buses. Amberley Publishing. ISBN 978-1-4456-5485-0. 96 pages.

That book was created in 2016 so therefore it's likely the entire book was copied from here ... just reworded here & there. –Davey2010^Talk 02:32, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That's obviously pure conjecture. Rcsprinter¹²³ (post) 22:45, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but that book was not created from scratch and that is clearly obvious- Unless you can find sources for each and every sentence in that book other than here then I'm afraid the answer is directly above you. –Davey2010^Talk 23:05, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Does need more referencing, but not reason enough to justify deletion. Have fished around for some bringing some up from external links, will wait on outcome of discussion before proceeding further. With 500 buses, certainly more notable than many of the bus companies with far smaller fleets that have articles.

Book mentioned above is a published work from a publishing house [1] independent of the author (David Devoy is not listed as an office bearer of Amberley Publishing Limited), so unlikely to be copied from an uncited Wikipedia article as insinuated. Devoy has written a number of books on other Scottish bus operators,[2] have the all been copied from Wikipedia? A big call. Having scanned through the online version of the book, is differs substantially to the article with a fair bit of information not in the article, so IMO we can rule this assertion out. Kelvin Central gains a few mentions in Commercial Motor articles, [3] other books on the Scottish Bus Group and contemporary Buses Magazine issues may also cover.

That many of the facts in both the book and the article is probably because they are the truth and have been drawn from the same sources, so stands to reason they are similar, would be more of a worry if they were telling a different story. If we were to assume that statements in published works that have already been stated in the equivalent Wikipedia article to be invalid, then we would be ruling out most published works from about 2005. Thistle202 (talk) 17:13, 5 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

keep it give it a shot — Preceding unsigned comment added by Busguy9 (talk • contribs) 05:07, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Those sources are great however the article needs to be fully sourced, A good 80% of what's in the article isn't in those books and I don't really want to delete most of the article, I would say it's valuable info that should be kept however paragraps etc do need sourcing (FWIW I'd love to ignore that but we can't unfortunately), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 17:07, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Subject of a five-page article in Buses Magazine in 1995 (which isn't cited here for some reason, but is mentioned in the article on one of their predecessors, Kelvin Scottish) together with many mentions in books and news articles from the time. Not every reference has to be online. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.100.245.192 (talk) 16:27, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Could you provide said source?, As for the online comment I did state directly above Obviously it being a 1989-1998 company there's going to be nothing on Google News ...... –Davey2010^Talk 17:03, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 03:20, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment article has been edited to what can be backed up by reliable sources. Thistle202 (talk) 18:53, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J 947^{^{^{(c) (m)}}} 04:57, 20 August 2017 (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.