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 keep‎. Opinion is virtually unanimous to Keep this article. And if we Draftified every article that was 100% sourced, then Draft space would be larger than Article space. We don't expect articles to be perfect, just good enough to demonstrate notability. Liz Read! Talk! 04:42, 13 March 2024 (UTC) reply

List of preserved Southern Pacific Railroad rolling stock

List of preserved Southern Pacific Railroad rolling stock (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is a procedural nomination on behalf of 14.203.182.49 following several requests at WT:AFD and elsewhere:

This article had sources for citations, but only 60% of the article has citations, which means that 40% of the article has no citations. This article also fails WP:GNG for a stand-alone list.

and

The notice "The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for stand-alone lists." on that article has been there since May 2017. And nothing has changed for it to meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for stand-alone lists.

I am neutral (though obviously the main issue is notability—everything else is fixable). Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 06:22, 6 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete - per nomination. 220.240.159.127 ( talk) 09:52, 6 March 2024 (UTC) reply
Aren't you the same person as the IP address that wanted this nominated? User_talk:Extraordinary_Writ#AFD_Request:_List_of_preserved_Southern_Pacific_Railroad_rolling_stock You make the same argument, and they have limited number of edits, then stop before you started with your few edits. So same person I assume. You can't vote delete here, since nominating it is your delete vote. Only vote once. Dream Focus 05:36, 7 March 2024 (UTC) reply
It happens by default is why. So yeah. 220.240.159.127 ( talk) 06:21, 7 March 2024 (UTC) reply
Draftify - I did suggest delete, now I have struck that vote as I've changed my mind. But I would recommend draftify because it needs more citations to meet GNG for a standalone list. I’m leaning to delete or even draftifying it. 220.240.159.127 ( talk) 19:21, 6 March 2024 (UTC) reply
There are 37 references already in the article. Deletion isn't cleanup. Any editing concerns you can discuss on the talk page. Dream Focus 20:47, 6 March 2024 (UTC) reply
If you read my comment again, I mentioned draftify, so I would suggest that the article gets moved to draftspace and can only be let back into the mainspace when the entire list is full of citations. (Meaning that it can only be in the mainspace after it has 100% citations). 220.240.159.127 ( talk) 04:44, 7 March 2024 (UTC) reply
Not how Wikipedia works. WP:NOTPERFECT Dream Focus 05:29, 7 March 2024 (UTC) reply
THIS ISN'T A JOKE @ Dream Focus. This is serious. This isn't a start-class article, nor a stub-class article. It's a list-class article.
Other lists like preserved Boeing aircraft meet the regulations because they have 100% citations. This one article on the other hand does not. 220.240.159.127 ( talk) 06:24, 7 March 2024 (UTC) reply
You are new to editing Wikipedia, so need to just stay out of AFDs until you understand things better. You also sound rather young. The notability of an article is not determined by its current state. Everyone else has said to keep it, you the only one arguing nonstop trying to delete/draft it. Nothing gained by that. Dream Focus 06:57, 7 March 2024 (UTC) reply
Or is it? 220.240.159.127 ( talk) 10:20, 7 March 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep per DreamFocus, Thryduulf and Kevin. Obviously the article can do with some extra referencing and stuff, but it's not that bad. S5A-0043 Talk 11:23, 9 March 2024 (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.
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 keep‎. Opinion is virtually unanimous to Keep this article. And if we Draftified every article that was 100% sourced, then Draft space would be larger than Article space. We don't expect articles to be perfect, just good enough to demonstrate notability. Liz Read! Talk! 04:42, 13 March 2024 (UTC) reply

List of preserved Southern Pacific Railroad rolling stock

List of preserved Southern Pacific Railroad rolling stock (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is a procedural nomination on behalf of 14.203.182.49 following several requests at WT:AFD and elsewhere:

This article had sources for citations, but only 60% of the article has citations, which means that 40% of the article has no citations. This article also fails WP:GNG for a stand-alone list.

and

The notice "The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for stand-alone lists." on that article has been there since May 2017. And nothing has changed for it to meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for stand-alone lists.

I am neutral (though obviously the main issue is notability—everything else is fixable). Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 06:22, 6 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete - per nomination. 220.240.159.127 ( talk) 09:52, 6 March 2024 (UTC) reply
Aren't you the same person as the IP address that wanted this nominated? User_talk:Extraordinary_Writ#AFD_Request:_List_of_preserved_Southern_Pacific_Railroad_rolling_stock You make the same argument, and they have limited number of edits, then stop before you started with your few edits. So same person I assume. You can't vote delete here, since nominating it is your delete vote. Only vote once. Dream Focus 05:36, 7 March 2024 (UTC) reply
It happens by default is why. So yeah. 220.240.159.127 ( talk) 06:21, 7 March 2024 (UTC) reply
Draftify - I did suggest delete, now I have struck that vote as I've changed my mind. But I would recommend draftify because it needs more citations to meet GNG for a standalone list. I’m leaning to delete or even draftifying it. 220.240.159.127 ( talk) 19:21, 6 March 2024 (UTC) reply
There are 37 references already in the article. Deletion isn't cleanup. Any editing concerns you can discuss on the talk page. Dream Focus 20:47, 6 March 2024 (UTC) reply
If you read my comment again, I mentioned draftify, so I would suggest that the article gets moved to draftspace and can only be let back into the mainspace when the entire list is full of citations. (Meaning that it can only be in the mainspace after it has 100% citations). 220.240.159.127 ( talk) 04:44, 7 March 2024 (UTC) reply
Not how Wikipedia works. WP:NOTPERFECT Dream Focus 05:29, 7 March 2024 (UTC) reply
THIS ISN'T A JOKE @ Dream Focus. This is serious. This isn't a start-class article, nor a stub-class article. It's a list-class article.
Other lists like preserved Boeing aircraft meet the regulations because they have 100% citations. This one article on the other hand does not. 220.240.159.127 ( talk) 06:24, 7 March 2024 (UTC) reply
You are new to editing Wikipedia, so need to just stay out of AFDs until you understand things better. You also sound rather young. The notability of an article is not determined by its current state. Everyone else has said to keep it, you the only one arguing nonstop trying to delete/draft it. Nothing gained by that. Dream Focus 06:57, 7 March 2024 (UTC) reply
Or is it? 220.240.159.127 ( talk) 10:20, 7 March 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep per DreamFocus, Thryduulf and Kevin. Obviously the article can do with some extra referencing and stuff, but it's not that bad. S5A-0043 Talk 11:23, 9 March 2024 (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.

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook