Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of busiest railway stations in Europe

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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.  Sandstein  09:33, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

List of busiest railway stations in Europe[edit]

List of busiest railway stations in Europe (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

An indiscriminate collection of original research. Aside from the figures suffering from linkrot, making verification difficult, there's no easy way of proving this list is correct. Indeed, I note that several figures for the Swiss stations have been challenged as failing verification, and the London stations don't seem to match up either, which throws the whole list into question.

If an individual source summarising this list exists (I can see the Gare du Nord is mentioned as the busiest in numerous places, but nothing else), then we can probably resolve this, but I can't find one. If we can't find anything, the whole thing needs blowing up and starting over. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:43, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 13:02, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 13:02, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Do you think List of the busiest airports in Europe should be deleted too? That also is sourced from various national statistics --Pontificalibus (talk) 16:15, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Ritchie333, I have problems to understand your objections – besides the huge problem of listing rankings with different sources, i.e. without a coordinating body/organization normalizing the different approaches of statistics and the different approaches of collecting figures. But there are a huge number of such questionable lists on WP!! – Regarding the Swiss figures: the given figures are hardly easier to verify; the given reference is working and therefore easily verifable. What exactely is your problem with it? -- ZH8000 (talk) 20:53, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Essentially the problem is described in Notability of standalone lists - "One accepted reason why a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources ... The entirety of the list does not need to be documented in sources for notability, only that the grouping or set in general has been". I have not found a source that shows the list itself is notable, and hence the article would seem to be original research. This explains why trying to improve it is a complete pain, as with these lists you can normally start with a source like that, which will get you most of the way there. This list doesn't. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:36, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. North America1000 21:27, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The nomination invokes essay wp:TNT, which for reasons listed at essay wp:TNTTNT is invalid. Including that the TNT argument acknowledges the validity of the topic for a Wikipedia article. --doncram 16:15, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:08, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:26, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • The fundamental problem with this list is that we have no source saying that these are indeed the 71 busiest stations in Europe. We have figures for the stations listed but not for the stations not listed, and I find it difficult to believe that there is no station in the former Eastern Bloc (apart from Germany) with over 30 million passenger movements per year. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 11:43, 20 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I have been unable to find any references or surveys of busiest railway stations in entire Europe. Without such a survey, this list is a collection of statistics from various sources and it not accurate. I agree with Ritchie333 that it is original research and it can be deleted.--DreamLinker (talk) 12:53, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • If something like this [1] can be found, this article may be salvageable. Otherwise, I think it is better to keep country level lists for which proper data is available.--DreamLinker (talk) 12:55, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jdcomix (talk) 01:58, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep According to my comment above, I can not follow the initiator's claims. All figures are sourced and most sources are valid. -- ZH8000 (talk) 11:27, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • The figures may well be accurate but they are only figures for particular stations in particular countries. We don't know whether there are other stations that may be in other countries with higher passenger numbers than those on the list. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 20:32, 24 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_busiest_railway_stations_in_Europe&oldid=1138005846"