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. – Juliancolton |
Talk 00:17, 15 November 2015 (UTC)reply
A lot of
Original research and unsourced material in present in this article. Also appears to be against
WP:NOTGUIDE. A summary of this should be included in the main articles in question.
Mdann52 (
talk) 21:45, 24 October 2015 (UTC)reply
I endorse my keep because, well, this is notable. Just because someone did not place secondary sources doesn't mean they don't exist, as
WP:BEFORE.
epic genius (
talk) 01:08, 28 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Also, no longer "speedy" due to the "speed" of this discussion.
epic genius (
talk) 03:05, 28 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Speedy keep, per Epic Genius. A centralized page for the fares makes much more sense, and there's no OR in this article whatsoever. ---------
User:DanTD (
talk) 03:15, 25 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete per nomination. Wikipedia is not to be used to republish commercial information, and that is all this article consists of. I have been told by
User:Epicgenius that there are no reliable secondary sources on this topic and that is also an indication that it should be deleted. --
John (
talk) 08:41, 25 October 2015 (UTC)reply
@
John: That is not actually what I meant. I said that the article doesn't need secondary sources for the fares. However, it is very easy for me to find secondary sources for the fare histories.
epic genius (
talk) 12:07, 25 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Hmm. It is hard to read
this other than as what I said but ok. If there are secondary sources, now is the time to bring them in as otherwise I think the article will need to be deleted. If there are other articles in this condition, they will also need to be brought in line with our norms. --
John (
talk) 19:23, 25 October 2015 (UTC)reply
That is what I am working to do right now.
epic genius (
talk) 01:13, 26 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep per
WP:BEFORE. Many secondary sources exist about this topic.
Bearian (
talk) 00:13, 28 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep per Epic Genius and DanTD. There is no OR in the article.
Vcohen (
talk) 09:41, 28 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —
UY ScutiTalk 19:48, 31 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete - A)This can and will overtime become severely outdated, B) We're
not a guide - It all belongs on the travel operators website, –
Davey2010Talk 00:55, 7 November 2015 (UTC)reply
You are speaking about the first half of the article, right?
Vcohen (
talk) 19:13, 7 November 2015 (UTC)reply
First, this article is about historical and current fares. As current fares become historic, new fares become updated. In fact, all articles will become outdated over time. Second, there are a lot of transit operators represented here.
WP:NOTGUIDE is when the article is named
MTA fares or
PATH fares.
epic genius (
talk) 03:24, 12 November 2015 (UTC)reply
I'm well aware what the article is, We don't need an article on bus fares in the US or any country for that matter - There's nothing encyclopedic or even notable about it, NOTGUIDE is basically this entire article. –
Davey2010Talk 03:31, 14 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —
UY ScutiTalk 18:13, 7 November 2015 (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.
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. – Juliancolton |
Talk 00:17, 15 November 2015 (UTC)reply
A lot of
Original research and unsourced material in present in this article. Also appears to be against
WP:NOTGUIDE. A summary of this should be included in the main articles in question.
Mdann52 (
talk) 21:45, 24 October 2015 (UTC)reply
I endorse my keep because, well, this is notable. Just because someone did not place secondary sources doesn't mean they don't exist, as
WP:BEFORE.
epic genius (
talk) 01:08, 28 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Also, no longer "speedy" due to the "speed" of this discussion.
epic genius (
talk) 03:05, 28 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Speedy keep, per Epic Genius. A centralized page for the fares makes much more sense, and there's no OR in this article whatsoever. ---------
User:DanTD (
talk) 03:15, 25 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete per nomination. Wikipedia is not to be used to republish commercial information, and that is all this article consists of. I have been told by
User:Epicgenius that there are no reliable secondary sources on this topic and that is also an indication that it should be deleted. --
John (
talk) 08:41, 25 October 2015 (UTC)reply
@
John: That is not actually what I meant. I said that the article doesn't need secondary sources for the fares. However, it is very easy for me to find secondary sources for the fare histories.
epic genius (
talk) 12:07, 25 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Hmm. It is hard to read
this other than as what I said but ok. If there are secondary sources, now is the time to bring them in as otherwise I think the article will need to be deleted. If there are other articles in this condition, they will also need to be brought in line with our norms. --
John (
talk) 19:23, 25 October 2015 (UTC)reply
That is what I am working to do right now.
epic genius (
talk) 01:13, 26 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep per
WP:BEFORE. Many secondary sources exist about this topic.
Bearian (
talk) 00:13, 28 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep per Epic Genius and DanTD. There is no OR in the article.
Vcohen (
talk) 09:41, 28 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —
UY ScutiTalk 19:48, 31 October 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete - A)This can and will overtime become severely outdated, B) We're
not a guide - It all belongs on the travel operators website, –
Davey2010Talk 00:55, 7 November 2015 (UTC)reply
You are speaking about the first half of the article, right?
Vcohen (
talk) 19:13, 7 November 2015 (UTC)reply
First, this article is about historical and current fares. As current fares become historic, new fares become updated. In fact, all articles will become outdated over time. Second, there are a lot of transit operators represented here.
WP:NOTGUIDE is when the article is named
MTA fares or
PATH fares.
epic genius (
talk) 03:24, 12 November 2015 (UTC)reply
I'm well aware what the article is, We don't need an article on bus fares in the US or any country for that matter - There's nothing encyclopedic or even notable about it, NOTGUIDE is basically this entire article. –
Davey2010Talk 03:31, 14 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —
UY ScutiTalk 18:13, 7 November 2015 (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.