Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Be'er Sheva North Railway 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  k eep. - Mailer Diablo 11:38, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Be'er Sheva North Railway Station
AfDs for this article: 
 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Completely non-notable and uninteresting. Please see WP:NOTE and WP:POINT before saying "It's as notable as other bus stations". Rambutan (talk) 15:24, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep The article is one of a series describing stations on a main inter-city railway line. BTW it isn't a bus station (please read my edit comment first before criticizing it). And there is no need to quote WP:POINT in an irrelevant fashion. I consider the examples of railway stations I quoted (as well as many others on WP) to be adequately notable, even though their content may appear to be little different from this one.--Redaktor 16:04, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - It has long been held the railway stations on intercity lines are notable. Isarig 16:07, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - Should keep it!Elmao 16:28, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - This station was the main station in beer sheva before beer sheva central. Just Keep It! Eden78 18:00, 3 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep Part of a series on all railway stations in Israel. Number   5  7  18:04, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - Mainline rail stations like this one are notable. --Oakshade 19:32, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per my long post here on the subject, with which I don't intend to bore everyone again —  iride scent   (talk to me!)  21:25, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment A little advice for the nominator: Giving uninterestingness as a reason for deletion, even as a corollary to something that could be reasonably backed up, is probably one of the top ways to get your deletion attempt nerfed in the quickest possible fashion. See WP:IDONTLIKEIT. LaMenta3 02:06, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep article subject is notable, precedent is for retention of such station articles, and article meets notability standards. Excuse given by nominator for this AfD is inexcusable. We should delete an article because it's "uninteresting"?!?! Alansohn 02:46, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 *  Delete per lack of significant coverage from independent sources. No, railway stations are not inherently notable - that would be in violation of WP:NOT#DIRECTORY Corpx 04:23, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Consensus on this issue seems rather clear, but let's hear why this would be a violation of WP:NOT. 05:17, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * List of every bus stop, bus station, bus, railway station is directory info.  If they're important, it is safe to assume that reliable sources would've paid coverage to it. Corpx 05:42, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


 * See WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS Corpx 06:51, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


 * This is not other "crap", this is precedent. Other than a small, stubborn minority, we have clear consensus that this article is notable and that other, similar articles are notable as well. The specious slippery slope claim that keeping this article means an article will be created for every "bus stop, bus station, bus, railway station" carries no weight. As usual, WP:NOT has been completely misinterpreted to mean that anything one editor doesn't like is a "Directory" listing; this is not a listing of railway stations, it is an article about a particular, notable station, and even listings of stations are encyclopedic and notable. Alansohn 16:38, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep. Railway stations are major nodes of an area's transportation network, and some stations smaller than this make their way into printed paper encyclopedias (Hallingskeid has an entry in Aschehoug for instance). Some further points: WP:RS points to "reliable" sources which is NOT the same as "independent" sources. WP:POINT is being quoted in an utterly silly fashion in the nomination (who is trying to disrupt Wikipedia here?). Sjakkalle (Check!)  14:37, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Agree with the precedent that main line railway stations are notable. Davewild 17:12, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment The only violation of WP:POINT was made by Elmao in making me scroll past that enormous list. Seriously, why? Sheffield Steel talkersstalkers 18:48, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh, I deleted for you, to don't get exhausted (It was a list of railway stations that already is on wikipedia, and those are not more interesting than this station. Elmao 03:07, 5 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep - as notable as Jordanhill railway station. Satisfies WP:N in general. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 07:49, 7 September 2007 (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.