Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alma-Atinskaya


 * 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. Snow keep. Deletion concerns have been addressed. (non-admin closure) Alpha_Quadrant    (talk)  22:25, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Alma-Atinskaya

 * – ( View AfD View log )

WP:CRYSTAL. Proposed stations do not get an article on Wikipedia. Artem Karimov (talk) 01:09, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - A lot of things wrong with this. Firstly, WP:CRYSTAL applies to unverified speculation. Even verified speculated topics can have articles.  But in this case, it actually is verified. .  To boot, it is long-standing practice that rail stations are considered notable and, in addition to the aforementioned article, this other one lends the topic to passing even the letter of WP:GNG. --Oakshade (talk) 05:23, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Existing stations are notable, not projects. Artem Karimov (talk) 11:40, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Projects, like this, can be notable. Even proposed projects can be notable. --Oakshade (talk) 21:18, 22 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete, neither "long-standing practice" nor a couple of brief blurbs make something notable. Only in-depth coverage does. Seraphimblade Talk to me 08:15, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:12, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:12, 21 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep -- since this is due to open next year, it or at least the railway is presumably already under construction. That is substantial enough not to be caught by WP:CRYSTAL, in my view.  Peterkingiron (talk) 17:45, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. Yes, I would concur that stations that are under construction or are scheduled to open soon on lines that are under construction are notable. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:22, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. The station is currently being constructed, so its existence is not a matter of speculation. Goudzovski (talk) 11:27, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry for my bad English :) This station isn't "proposed" as nominator said! This station is building now. There are some sources to prove my words. Firstly, you can see article in Russian Wikipedia, in which there are 4 photos of building of the station. On the one of these photos you can find that station will be open in 2012 (I made these photos in August) Also Alma-Atinskaya station was visited by Sergey Sobyanin, Mayor of Moscow. He said that this station will be open in time (in the end of 2012, probably in December).
 * It's good luck that I live in this district of Moscow, where station was building (ever my nickname connected to this district! ). After passing my exams, I can make another photos, in which all users can understand that the process of building the station continues! And now - Keep this article. -- Brateevsky ( talk to me ) 18:53, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep: per Goudzovski-- Sabri76' talk 12:11, 23 December 2011 (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.