Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ben Cruachan Quarry Branch


 * 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 merge to Callander and Oban Railway. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  10:16, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Ben Cruachan Quarry Branch

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

There are no reliable sources currently cited in the article and it has a very marginal claim for inclusion on Wikipedia besides. Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 15:40, 21 May 2022 (UTC) Keep. All railroads and railroad lines, current and historical, should have articles. Newyorkbrad (talk) 12:04, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Scotland. Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 15:40, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete clearly not notable. And trout the editor who de-PRODed this. A BEFORE search found a few brief mentions which confirm this line existed, but little else. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 15:53, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete unless, the de-prodder, can prove the sources they found exist. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 21:55, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep A British branch line is highly likely to have offline sources available. At the very least, the content here including the diagram ought to be merged elsewhere and not deleted. NemesisAT (talk) 22:34, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep, merge or broaden article to include the quarry. For those coming into this discussion afresh, what's happened is that the nominator has decided that the source Railscot, which had 1489 links from articles, is unreliable, and after a discussion that started on 14 May, which involved three other editors, one of whom didn't exactly agree, none of whom are known to me from WP Scotland (which wasn't notified, as far as I can see), decided to remove all reference links to it, and has been rolling out that decision with uninformative edit summaries, and edits marked as minor. Further to that decision comes this prod, on an article which had been supported by this source (added this February to deal with a longstanding unreferenced tag). However, whether or not Railscot is reliable, the information there appears to be broadly correct according to other sources. There are multiple sources available online which confirm the basics. Granites and Our Granite Industries pp 94–95 has three paragraphs on the quarries with some details of the branch line. The West Highland Lines: Post-Beeching  pp 37–38 has details on the branch line and junction.  article has a long paragraph/table on the quarries, and also other mentions elsewhere, discusses the railway's effect on livestock and mentions that it is now dismantled; it reproduces the OS map, confirming that the zigzag track is actually the dismantled railway. Some details  from a site on the Callander and Oban Railway.  from the The Signalling Record Society has brief info on the railway/junction. The Highlands and Islands of Scotland p. 193  has some info (snippet view only). Google Books also gave a hit for Callander & Oban Railway Through Time  (no preview). The OS 1:25 000 mapping for grid ref NN12502945 clearly shows track zigzags serving a marked disused quarry. The railway is mentioned by the Scottish Mountaineering Club Journal as an ascent route onto Ben Cruachan  and there may well be more modern guidebooks that take that route but aren't on Google Books. Additionally, on the quarry, Dalmally Historical Society mention it in their timeline: ; as they publish a journal, there might well be more to be found there.  has quite a few details on the quarry.  discusses a lawsuit over the quarry, which is also covered in news coverage. Espresso Addict (talk) 22:47, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
 * You do recognize that WP:NOPAGE applies here? There's no way a comprehensive article could be written on this subject. It should not be kept as a standalone article. Use of NOPAGE is frequently done with railroads which were very minor, only existed on paper, or otherwise do not merit a standalone page (e.g. the Middletown Extension Railroad). Trainsandotherthings (talk) 13:57, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
 * If editors are opposed to deletion, this can easily be merged to Callander and Oban Railway. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 14:05, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 17:53, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Merge to Callander and Oban Railway. Djflem (talk) 15:36, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Redirect and merge to Callander and Oban Railway. Mjroots (talk) 17:45, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Redirect and merge - this seems the way to go. While some industrial branch lines might be notable enough to have their own articles, but I do not think this is one of them. There might be an argument for an article on the quarry, but as it stands the Callander and Oban Railway article can cover this adequately. Dunarc (talk) 22:45, 3 June 2022 (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.