Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TLC Travel

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 merge to West Yorkshire Metro. Selective merge, as most commenters indicate that the sourcing is not good enough. The editors carrying out the merger may want to note Peter James's argument about redirect targets in mind. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 18:39, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

TLC Travel[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)

Non notable bus company, Found this but that's it, Fails NCORP & GNG –Davey2010^Talk 16:21, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:15, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:15, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:15, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete: Nothing turns out significant with a quick Google search, lack WP:RS, non-notable local bus company. Meeanaya (talk) 05:00, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- What are the grounds are for speedy deletion? Simply doing a Google search is not a sufficient search to determine the notability of an article - most sources about bus information are likely to be offline too. Bookscale (talk) 13:31, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to West Yorkshire Metro (the local transport brand) for the moment. Although the article lacks some sources, the article is written in an encyclopedic manner and actually contains some information about the company's bus operations. There are some sources about the bus company albeit limited (e.g. here). An example where an alternative to deletion (but without retaining a standalone page) is appropriate. Bookscale (talk) 13:31, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reading the article TLC had won Bradford AccessBus contracts from West Yorkshire Metro .... but that's it .... so IMHO it seems pointless merging into essentially an unrelated brand ?, I have no objections to merging but only if it's being merged to related things which doesn't really seem to be the case here?. –Davey2010^Talk 14:20, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think the intention was that it was one of the companies contracting under the brand (similar to other deregulated transport contracts). Happy for a better suggestion if available? Bookscale (talk) 12:13, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the article, it's not notable itself.Forest90 (talk) 17:10, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- What do you mean, your comment doesn't make sense? Bookscale (talk) 22:58, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To discuss the merger proposal
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 05:50, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merge selectively (a couple of lines only) to West Yorkshire Metro, per Bookscale. Agree that the article is properly written, but it lacks evidence of notability, offered or to be found. As such, the amount of detail in current article would be excessive to port into the target article. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 17:21, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Most of its services seem to be subsidised, and therefore probably contracts for West Yorkshire Metro (although wymetro.com doesn't specify whether this applies to all services on a route or only certain times or days). However, it is not part of West Yorkshire Metro, so a redirect would be misleading. Peter James (talk) 22:52, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per Booksacale and Hobbes... Out of curiosity, aren't you meant to be retired Davey2010? Or have you caught the Wiki bug again! XD Nightfury 10:53, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Not flaffing around with the above but I have no objections to merging - Admittedly I didn't quite get it but having read Peters rationale I think merging would be best perhaps. –Davey2010^Talk 15:56, 31 July 2019 (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.