Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Airdrie Transit


 * 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.  Syn  ergy 10:39, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Airdrie Transit

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Nothing more than a bus timetable for a non-notable company. Local interest only. Speedy was removed, sole contributor promised this was only a stub and would improve article. Nothing substantial added since. Unable to find any third party references of note. Dmol (talk) 15:03, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep looks a perfectly valid transport-stub to me. – iride  scent  15:21, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * KEEP - This is one of eleven public transit systems in Alberta and if it is missing, like a small piece of a jigsaw puzzle, the remainder lacks context. There are many transportation articles on individual railway stations and bus routes which individually are less important but when looked at in relation to the overall system they become relevant. A stub does not require instant action but is an article to be expanded and developed cooperatively. -Secondarywaltz (talk) 16:22, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a valid excuse for AfD. This system most likely can't be expanded to more than stub status. --Seascic T/C 18:13, 6 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep Bus transit systems in significant metropolitan areas are notable. --Polaron | Talk 16:52, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * That is true, however, Airdrie is a very small "one-horse" city. --Seascic T/C 18:13, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Uh, no it isn't. It has a population of more than 30,000 and is part of the Calgary Regional Partnership (i.e. Greater Calgary). Defining a city of this size as one-horse violates WP:NPOV in this instance. 23skidoo (talk) 15:00, 7 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep as per User:Secondarywaltz. Transportation systems are often interlinked with each other, and the individual parts affect the workings of the whole. --Eastlaw (talk) 17:37, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge into Airdrie article. While this is an article about an entire system, the system is very small (it only has three routes). It is not integrated with any other transit systems in the province. Also, the commuter service to Calgary is provided by a completely different service, and is completely independent Airdrie Transit. Take all relevent information and merge it into the Airdrie article. --Seascic T/C 18:13, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge/Redirect to Airdrie, Alberta. -- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 03:43, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep but expand. Major city in Alberta, which in turn is also part of the Greater Calgary metropolitan region. That therefore makes it a transit system in a significant metropolitan region. Article can also be expanded to include discussions of proposed rail and bus connections to CrossIron Mills and Calgary itself. 23skidoo (talk) 15:00, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  17:22, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  17:22, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, scheduled transit systems are notable. Arsenikk (talk)  18:46, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep -- Just about enough to be notable, but I would be unhappy about this being expanded much: bus timetables are best maintained by the bus company. However, I would not oppose Merge to Airdrie, Alberta.  Peterkingiron (talk) 22:30, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * There's not one single solitary thing even remotely "timetabley" about this article as written. Although I have no particularly strong feelings about it, keep if only on the basis that the nomination rationale is false. Bearcat (talk) 19:35, 8 August 2008 (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.