Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/15th/Clark 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. czar 02:07, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

15th/Clark station

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is WP:TOO SOON and this station may not be built at all. Richton Shore (talk) 04:55, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete, outdated, and it's not even a CTA-backed proposal.  Cards   84664   05:17, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: This AfD was not properly transcluded, and should run for at least 7 days from this relist.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:49, 10 July 2020 (UTC)


 * delete The article is outdated, and it does seem that a station will be built— sometime. And when that station gets a definite name and is actually planned out and construction starts, it can have an article, but right now is WP:TOOSOON. Mangoe (talk) 14:58, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
 * delete per non --Devokewater (talk) 15:08, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:CRYSTAL, though a couple of sentence eentry on the Red Line article might have been appropriate (if not WP:UNDUE expanded). The fact some sources show the proposal was blocked/opposed but this was not mentioned in the article was a WP:POV issue though not a WP:AFD issue.  The fact the article creator was blocked is also not good.Djm-leighpark (talk) 07:59, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:TOOSOON (probably) applies. ——  § erial  10:31, 16 July 2020 (UTC)


 * 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.