Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Xinzheng East Railway Station

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. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:56, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Xinzheng East Railway Station[edit]

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

Cannot find any references on the Internet, and it is not a railway station on Shiwu HSR. 寿司猫 (talk) 03:22, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Rewrite Searching for 新郑东站, it seems it is used as an alternative name for the Zhengzhou gaotie station, which formally speaking is 郑州东站 and already has an article Zhengzhou East Railway Station. Easy to see the confusion, as many HSR stations have the "xin" prefix.

On the other hand, 新郑火车站 (Google maps link) is a real station, but in the older Jingguang railroad, not Shiwu HSR. It's a fairly old station (1905), clearly notable for being in a major city in a major railway line. So maybe just rename? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.222.164.96 (talk) 16:16, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 17:36, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 17:36, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

- 'Xinzheng' is a county-level city of Zhengzhou, 'Xin' does not mean 'new'. Xinzheng Station is different from this station.寿司猫 (talk) 11:07, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 15:24, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

- Xinzheng East (新郑东站) is the name of the Xinzheng station, it is not the Zhengzhou station. Built in 1976, according to Baidu, which is by no means reliable - where did you get 1905 from? Also, I believe Shiwu line is part of the Jingguang line, so no contradiction there. Kraikk (talk) 07:37, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep Okay, da capo. When you search for 新郑东站石武高铁， there appears a largish number of discussion groups, blogs etc using the term. If you read them, it seems that they are making a mistake, using 新郑东站 for the Zhengzhou gaotie station, which is officially Zhengzhou dong. The mistake probably comes from the "xin" used in many gaotie stations (those posts are probably not by Henan locals, so unfamiliar with Xinzheng as a location). My guess is that the creator of the article made the same mistake. It doesn't matter. It is a mistake to say that Xinzheng Dong is a shiwu HSR station.

Now, a separate issue. Xinzheng Station and/or Xinzheng East station (Found 1905 date for Xinzheng station in a not-super-reliable source. Not sure if Xinzheng East is a separate newer station, a relocation of the old station, or an alternative name) are real stations of the Jingguang line (which is a distinct and separate line from the Shiwu HSR, running on its own rails, although the two lines are sort of parallel. Shiwu line is part of the "Jingguangshengang" HSR line, which is often called the Jingguang PDL. It is rather confusing). I thought Xinzheng was just a suburb of Zhengzhou, but it doesn't matter if it is a fully separate entity. I think the general consensus is that all stations of a major railway line are notable (and will generally get mentioned often in third-party materials). I am, however, not sure whether this is true. IF that's the case, it may be okay to keep the article and just change the information to fit the facts of Xinzheng East station. Xinzheng East (Jingguang line) station may also be notable in its own right, of course. I just noticed there is an ethnography book about it, when you search for it in English. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.166.7.155 (talk) 12:30, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unless significant coverage in reliable secondary sources can be found. I'm incapable of searching in Chinese, but from the above it appears that what does exist (blogs, forums) are not reliable sources and thus can't be considered as part of this discussion. Is there any discussion in books or widely circulated newspapers? This would help establish notability under the WP:GNG guidelines. --Batard0 (talk) 08:04, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I simply do not see any point for this entry in WP. If there is a reason to develop the page based on new information coming to light, the page can be easily recreated. Nothing here to constitute a loss to anyone in the removal of the page. Fireflo (talk) 12:09, 19 October 2012 (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.