Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Central 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 no consensus. Whereas many useful ideas have surfaced out in this discussion, unfortunately, not a single one created consensus. Let us try again in a while.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:45, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Central station

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article says very little beyond saying that "'Central' is a common element in big city train station names" and then providing a list of stations that are, by someone's definition, "central". But for instance the German name being used as a criterion is Hauptbahnhof, as referenced in Categories for discussion/Log/2013 May 3, not Zentralbahnhof; in the US "Central" stations tend to be those built by "central" railroads: the best known example, Grand Central Station in NYC, is so named because it was built by the New York Central Railroad, not for its location or importance. Thus I see no real common concept addressed by this article, other than a subjective notion of mainness or centrality. Mangoe (talk) 13:14, 4 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom, or at least convert to a disambiguation page listing all stations named "central". - filelakeshoe (t / c) 13:18, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.  czar   &middot;   &middot;  14:51, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions.  czar   &middot;   &middot;  14:51, 4 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete. About as useful as a bing search, a serious case of Synthesis--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 15:43, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Union station with a possible separate chapter, with the additional option of a dab page or list. For the record, the current Union Station article should have the "List of Union Stations" name restored. ---User:DanTD (talk) 15:55, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Redirecting it there would be a bad idea as Union seems only to be an American thing whilst Central is worldwide. For example, in the UK and France there are no stations that have Union in the name. Simply south...... eating shoes for just 7 years 20:52, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, No information whatsoever.... just Lists of train stations.... Seems a pointless article to me........ →Davey 2010→  →Talk to me!→  15:58, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep and improve. The subject is valid and the article just needs sorting out, not deleting. The primary station of a city is frequently called the "Central Station" and, in some countries, it is actually formally defined as such. It has nothing to do with Union stations. --Bermicourt (talk) 19:34, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Nobody needs an article to understand that there is often a single main/central station in a city of sufficient size; it's actually more remarkable that Paris and London do not have a single primary station, and that many smallish American cities are served by two or more stations. The article spends some time (not all that much) in an attempt to explain the obvious, but as the associated category is not well-defined, so the list's membership ends up being based on the arbitrary criterion of picking a set of words to be used as synonyms for "central" and including any station that uses one of those words. Mangoe (talk) 11:51, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Those are strong arguments to improve the existing article; thank you for highlighting specific areas that need attention. --Bermicourt (talk) 13:03, 5 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Central Station (disambiguation), which has a better list of central train stations anyways. Ansh666 20:02, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Er, take another look. The dab page list is poorly organized, has far fewer entries and at least 2 entries that shouldn't be in the list. Truth is, the central station article got hacked and slashed following a spurious argument over the translation of Hauptbahnhof and has not recovered since. I have started some rework to make it more encyclopaedic, but don't currently have access to my offline sources. --Bermicourt (talk) 20:26, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Awkward...I got the two mixed up. Too many central stations! I think a merging of the two in some form, with one being a list and the other detailing the "concept" more, would be better. So I guess I should !vote keep for now? Ansh666 20:40, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Re that comment and your random moving of Praha hl.n. to Prague Central Station (despite knowing that article has already had 2 RMs and the correct action is to nominate it for a third), the spurious argument is the one that "central station" means "main station" everywhere in the world. Each country in the world has different naming conventions for railway stations and in Czech Republic there are many cities (like Ostrava and, in the past, Prague) which have a "main station" (hlavní nádraží) and a "central" (střed). A uniform naming convention of calling every big station around the world "Foo Central Station" is original research, and this article's purpose just seems to be to push that. - filelakeshoe (t / c) 08:15, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I am surprised that you, as an admin, are using personal criticism ("random move" - it wasn't; and "despite knowing that article has already had 2 RMs" - no, I didn't actually) and abusing your admin rights by reverting article moves, something the rest of us can't do. That aside, easy research shows that "Foo Central Station" is a common English translation, not least for "Prague Central Station" - just check out google (73,000 hits) and google books (88) (yes I know google needs treating with caution, but 73,000 tells a story), whilst the average English reader of Wikipedia will have some difficulty with Praha hl.n. or Praha hlavní nádraží. All of which is tangentially related to this article, which is not about pushing a convention - that's a straw man argument. The article needs improving, not wiping out. --Bermicourt (talk) 12:50, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
 * BOLD moves are only supposed to be done when the case is uncontroversial, so not something which has had 2 no consensus RMs (both of which you !voted in). As for this article, could you tell us what you think the point of it is? To list every major station of every city in the world, or to list every station named "Central"? (centraal, centrale, střed etc.) If it's the former then there are plenty of stations named "Central" in the UK which are not, by that definition, "Central Stations", and plenty of places around the world where there's a "main station" and another station called "central", and if it's the latter then that amounts to a list of trivia. - filelakeshoe (t / c) 14:05, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I'M SO CONFUSED NOW T__T okay to closing admin I officially don't exist in this one. Ansh666 08:51, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Split page - I think there could be useful information for a Central station concept article. However, trying to list every single central station in the world will be a problem. In fact there are many stations that could be considred central stations are they are located in the centre. Simply south...... eating shoes for just 7 years 20:52, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * keep I don't know why we wouldn't list every single central station. We have much bigger lists. But this one could be a list of "notable" central stations, e.g. ones for which Wikipedia has an article. I think this is quite reasonable and fits within the bounds of notability esp for a list-type article.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 03:26, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
 * All major railway stations in cities would be notable, so it would be, once all articles exist, a list of every single "central station". - filelakeshoe (t / c) 14:05, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep and partially replace with Central station (disambiguation). Half of this is just a list of "Central Station"s in the world. Only the main idea is relevant. -- Epicgenius (talk to me • see my contributions) 20:35, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment. As a variation on some of the suggestions above, the main article could discuss the usage of the term around the world, listing only notable and relevant examples in each country. So where a country ("Foo") has more than a handful of such stations, its section would have a link to a separate "List of central stations in Foo". That would certainly be neater and more encyclopaedic. --Bermicourt (talk) 20:47, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment. This article should really just be "Hauptbahnhof" and explain the conventional usage of this term in the German speaking world. It appears to have suffered from translation into English followed by corruption by attempts to add further examples from other networks. Railwayfan2005 (talk) 22:56, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment. I think deciding what to do with this Central station page is connected with the wider question of how to treat the proper names of railway stations. It is unclear to me what purpose the Central station page currently serves, other than being used as an attempt to push "Central station" as a new English-language term meaning something like the main station in a city, whether or not it is actually called that outside Wikipedia or whether it is actually central; and for certain stations in the benighted lands on the wrong side of Dover the name which Wikipedia should use instead of the WP:COMMONNAME found in WP:ENGLISH-language reliable WP:SOURCES. Take the opening phrase "In many countries, a central station is generally the primary railway station in a large town or city", which gives no source, and doesn't reflect UK or Irish or US or French or German practice (whereabouts is it true?). Or look at the hoops someone is jumping though to try to define "Hauptbahnhof" as meaning Central station (perhaps Wikipedians have never been to Karslruhe or Vienna? And why aren't we renaming anything else with a German name, only the Hauptbahnhofs - why not a Tempelhof as well?) with the circular arguments between the station articles which have been renamed and this one. Meanwhile, other people are using this article to point out that such an agenda does not actually reflect the non-Wikipedia real world as it stands. A "list of stations named Central" is fundamentally incompatible with a "list of the main stations in various places" (see Brussels, Liverpool, Exeter, Prague etc, not to mention the Paris, London, Moscow etc question). This page has become part of the same debate.
 * (For the record, personally I'd trust DB, SNCB, CD, Thomas Cook, Modern Railways, Today's Railways, the BBC, CNN and the Grauniad more than I'd trust unsourced claims in Wikipedia, and the terminology they use is good enough for me!) Wheeltapper (talk) 23:19, 7 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep WP:SIA (but the title should probably be "Central Station"). The stations not just called "Central Station" could be removed from the disambiguation page. Peter&#160;James (talk) 17:12, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete or completely overhaul to make it a set index article restricted to stations literally called "central station" in English or in the local language. It's quite clear from the opening paragraph that we don't know what this article is about. It basically says "a central station is at the center of the city or maybe not and may be called something else but we're still going to consider that it's a central station if we estimate that it's roughly equivalent and for good measure we'll also include stations called "central station" for unrelated reasons." Including the Hauptbahnhofs seems dubious: declaring that the correct translation of "Hauptbahnof" is "central station", rather than "main station" is somewhat arbitrary and in many contexts, English sources don't even translate Hauptbahnhof. In particular, if you're buying train tickets, in Belgium, France, Italy and other neighboring countries, the stations will be listed as XYZ Hauptbahnhof or XYZ Hbf. Pichpich (talk) 13:29, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The haupt prefix literally means "head" but should be taken in the figurative sense of "main" or "primary". It doesn't imply centrality of location. It should also be recalled that a "head station" is a terminus station, that is, one to which the tracks come and stop, as opposed the other other pattern of having platforms on either side of through trackage. I doubt that this sense is meant but the point here is that the concept this article is trying to over is vague and to a large degree subjective and arbitrary. Mangoe (talk) 14:03, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Doesn't haupt in this context translate to main, rather than head? A terminus is called a kopfbahnhof ('head station') in German. Kopf is also the word used for the part of the body attached to the neck. English-language announcements, timetables and passenger information of course use Hauptbahnhof, as does the media: even the Daily Mail, so famed for its tolerant and broadminded attitude to things foreign, is willing to talk about "the Hauptbahnhof, Berlin's main train station". Wheeltapper (talk) 14:57, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I guess that the (dubious) rationale for translating Hauptbahnhof as "central station" is that when English sources translate the German word, "central station" seems to be the most common translation with "main station" a close second if one trusts my very unreliable research through Google. I think Dortmund Central Station should be moved to Dortmund Hauptbahnhof because it's the most recognizable name but even if one disagrees with that idea, it should be recognized that including the Hauptbahnhofs as central stations is only a product of our translation. Pichpich (talk) 16:02, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The impression I've got from previous debates on this matter is that the (dubious) rationale is that Central is what assorted stations might have been called were the natives to speak (an unspecified version of) English rather than speaking some foreign lingo. Which is completely unverifiable. I see the latest Today's Railways has an article called "Wien Hauptbahnhof delayed". Wheeltapper (talk) 18:00, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Today's Railways has a policy of never translating names into English, even when well known terms exist in English. Wikipedia's policy is different.--Grahame (talk) 02:15, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I thought Wikipedia's policy was in large part to follow the lead of reliable sources on the subject such as Today's Railways. Pichpich (talk) 02:43, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
 * So did I, based on WP:COMMONNAME: "determined by its prevalence in reliable English-language sources". And the The Guardian: at a building site near the Hauptbahnhof, CNN: near the Hauptbahnhof, Deutsche Welle: north of the Berlin Hauptbahnhof, and China Daily: Berlin's main Hauptbahnhof Railway Station also used Hauptbahnhof in recent news stories. Aside from stations, see also the Wikipedia articles on the Reichstag building (Imperial Parliament or Houses of Parliament (Germany)?), Oktoberfest (September festival? Great German Beer Festival?), Arc de Triomphe (Triumphal arch? Wellington Arch (Paris)?), and TGV (HST? InterCity 186?), all of which follow sources rather than try to devise an "English" name.
 * I see no evidence that Today's Railways is a reliable source on English naming conventions. It always calls Cologne "Köln", which is not normal English practice.--Grahame (talk) 01:43, 14 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep. It has a legitimate basis as an article.--Grahame (talk) 02:15, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
 * That doesn't say much... Do you think the article should list every station with a foreign name that a Wikipedia editor deems sufficiently close in spirit to "central station"? Can you reconcile this with including stations who are called "Central" by accident? If not, what exactly is that legitimate basis you mention? Pichpich (talk) 02:40, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree that it would be more legitimate if it was called Hauptbahnhof, which has a defined meaning.--Grahame (talk) 02:45, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Hmm... Then I don't really see where we disagree. Clearly we can't rename this article Hauptbahnhof since the bulk of its content is stations in non-German speaking countries. If you're saying that the article should be split into two (or more) set index articles, then I'd support this happily but your "keep" is at the very least ambiguous. Pichpich (talk) 03:00, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I support renaming it as Hauptbahnhof, and keeping the relevant content. I agree that the content of the article for non-German speaking countries does not appear to have a coherent rationale.--Grahame (talk) 03:19, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Maybe I'm being stupid but I still don't see what you mean. If we rename this article to Hauptbahnhof then the only relevant content in the current article will be the section on Germany (although sections on Switzerland and Austria could be added). If your preferred option is "remove 90% of the content and move what's left to a new name", then I like that option but how is it different from "delete"? Pichpich (talk) 03:54, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
 * It is different if we end up with a short article on the concept Hauptbahnhof (which is all that it deserves).--Grahame (talk) 08:15, 10 May 2013 (UTC)


 * further commentary on the German I see from the German Wikipedia that our notion of a "head station" (that is, one without through trackage) translates very literally to kopfbahnhof. But I also find that DB has a set of seven station categories, with the hauptbahnhöfe (mostly) sharing Category 1 with various other major stations (e.g. Berlin has something like six). This seems a more notable grouping. Mangoe (talk) 03:58, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Hauptbahnhof has nothing to do with a "head station" (kopfbahnhof), it just means the most important station in a city/municipality. The German's generally prefix the municipal name to their stations so the Hauptbahnhof is the one that has no prefix. Bad Dürkheim station is a kopfbahnhof, but not a Hauptbahnhof. Hauptbahnhofs range down to category 6 (Gevelsberg Central Station.--Grahame (talk) 08:03, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Is "head station" an English term? The (British) English equivalent of kopfbahnhof is "terminus". Wheeltapper (talk) 08:10, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I would have thought that "terminus" was the normal English for kopfbahnhof.--Grahame (talk) 08:15, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, there seems to be some sort of rule that Brit and US terminology have to be different, but in any case the German word refers to a station where the tracks come into the building and stop, as opposed to the sort where they pass through the platforms and keep going. And I welcome Grahame's correction. At any rate all of these categorizations are tending to bunch up into "shared name" groups, whether the shared element is "central", "union", or "haupt". That to my mind puts the kibosh on the categorizations, but it also seems to me that the name issue is better served by some clean up in train station which among other things would address this issue of naming all in one place. Mangoe (talk) 10:20, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
 * "Hauptbahnhof" literally means "head railway yard". That's "head" as in "main", "chief" or "principal". It says nothing about whether the station is centrally situated. By contrast, "Central Station" is ambiguous: the word "central" could mean "main", "chief" or "principal", but might also mean either "centrally situated" or "this station belongs (or once belonged) to a railway company which had the word 'central' in its name". Neither of the terms "Hauptbahnhof" nor "Central Station" have any information about whether the tracks are necessarily dead-end or not. -- Red rose64 (talk) 11:50, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Literal translation doesn't always help. A Hauptmann in the Army is a "captain"; it's literal meaning of "chief man" doesn't really help. What is essential in translation is to understand how the foreign word is applied in reality and then identify the nearest equivalent term in English. A Hauptbahnhof is (usually) the primary station in a city or large town; in some cases its original significance has been lost due to changes in transport demand over decades. In English, we do not use the term "head station" and very few examples are called "Main Station". By contrast "Central Station" is far more common and is the nearest equivalent in terms of usage: usually named because it was originally the primary station in a city or town that had more than one station, but again in some cases it has lost than significance but retained the name. Go back in history and you will find that the German word used to be Zentralbahnhof! But this article is not just about German usage, but about the many countries that also use the term "central station" or equivalent in very much the same way. Yes, there are differences; the value of an article like this is that it can highlight and explain all that, linking, where necessary, to individual country articles. Bermicourt (talk) 10:30, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Is there any evidence that stations called Central were "usually named because it was originally the primary station"? That isn't true of the UK, nor it would seem the USA or Australia, so where is it true? Can we find some hard examples of, say, New Street or Paragon or Waverley being called (rather than described as) "Central station"? Or examples of main stations which are not physically central being called Central while a minor but central station is called something else? I note that Hauptmann has its own page under the German name (which says that both the English and German words derive from "head", rather than "chief") it isn't a redirect to Captain (armed forces) or translated to Captain (German). It is also unclear why we actually need to identify equivalent terms to proper names in the first place - especially if the result is confusing and ambiguous (is Central station the main one or the central one?) and misleading (Karlsruhe Central station?) Wheeltapper (talk) 11:24, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
 * This is all Tosh. As someone pointed out above Grand central in New york got the appellation from the railway company name, not it's location in NY.  Lincoln Central was nearer to the historic town than St Marks, and was called that as a differentiator.  Gainsborough Central is an absolute dump compared to Gainsborough Lea Road, and was called Central because the LNER got it from the Great Central - it wasn't called Central till 1923.   Liverpool Lime Street was always important than Liverpool Central, and right next to the town hall and the Astoria.  Liverpool Central seems to have been named by the CLC because the station at the other end of the line was Manchester Central.  There is no commonality or underlying 'message'.  You might as well have a list of all stations called ...High Level or ...Street.
 * As for trying to make a link with Hauptbahnhof, I personally think that is just wrong. The name of Berlin Hauptbahnhof is Berlin Hauptbahnhof not Berlin Central. But I am on a loosing battle here, even www.raileurope.com and www.berlin.de assume that the english for Hauptbahnhof is Central Station.  Belgrade Station is Belgrade Central Station now.  The principle station in Brisbane is Central railway station.
 * I guess that what we can say is that in many cases the principle station in a City may be called X Central Station when expressed in English. (not, you notice, X Central).  But in the UK and some other English-speaking countries this convention does not exist in the same way.
 * I'm not sure that is a basis for an article, though. It is just a statement with no content.--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 13:48, 12 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Another example of where "Central" is ambiguous is Acton, an area of west London. There are multiple stations for the area but Acton Town tube station, Ealing Common tube station and Acton Central railway station are all equidistance from the centre of Acton. Simply south...... eating shoes for just 7 years
 * And not all Hauptbahnhof are very Haupt - Hauptbahnhof Sedelsberg--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 14:40, 12 May 2013 (UTC)


 * All of which goes to show that it is worth having the article, not least to explain all these different nuances, both in English, and other languages. If there were one simple dictionary definition, then it would make sense to leave it to Wiktionary, but there isn't, there is a wealth of material and host of different examples, complete with great images, for an article! What it needs is improving to address some of the concerns above. Let's give that a try before giving up! Bermicourt (talk) 15:42, 12 May 2013 (UTC)


 * What it means is that the main train station article needs to explain this complex of somewhat related words. Mangoe (talk) 16:36, 12 May 2013 (UTC)


 * It seems that much of the confusion is the result of attempts to use this article to try to establish the phrase "Central station" as having the meaning "the main station" within Wikipedia, which it does not have anywhere else. This page is then being used to argue that some stations which are not called "Central station" should be renamed as Central station within Wikipedia, while the renamed station articles are being used to justify this page. These problems would solve themselves if we just stuck to following sources and using the names of the stations which everyone else does; no-one seems to want to include Roma Termini on this list, because (so far!) no-one wants to rename its article to Rome Central station. What we really need is a clear policy on whether the normal WP:UE and wp:commonname apply to stations. If they do, then we don't invent new names for stations, and this page becomes "list of stations with the word Central in their name". If the stations do need Wikipedia rather than real-world names, then this page can become "list of stations which a Wikipedia policy which we specify here says should be renamed Central, but without those stations named by railways which forgot to check Wikipedia before naming their station". Wheeltapper (talk) 18:55, 12 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep. If "central station" meant simply "a station that is central", as the nominator assumes, then of course there would be no reason for an article of this type. But in fact "central station" is the common name for a type of station, as is evident from this ngram. This usage derives from the fact that, for whatever reason, the principle station of certain cities was named in the form "Foo Central Station." But the usage is now part of the English language, independent of the formal name of any particular station. The drive to delete this article appears to stem from opposition to the practice of translating station names. Translation is not original research! Let's not lose sight of the forest for the trees: Our purpose is to write reference material that English-speakers can read. Collins German-English Dictionary defines hauptbahnhof as "main or central station”. I did not make the translation up, and I don't appreciate the repeated accusations to this effect. Here is Spiegel Online: “Travelers at Berlin's central station faced disruptions after a series of petrol bombs were discovered along railway lines in the German capital last week.” Here we see the phrase "central station" used to refer to a type of station, a type that is understood to include the main railway station in Berlin. Deutsche Welle has a full-length English-language article on the Berlin station which refers to it as a "central station" and as a "central railway station" several times, but not once as a "hauptbahhof." I ask those who oppose translation this question: Should the main station in Beijing be called "北京火车站" or Běijīng huǒchēzhàn? Kauffner (talk) 04:19, 13 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Note that while Deutsche Welle might describe Hauptbahnof as being Berlin's central station, it says it is called Hauptbahnof: World War II bomb interrupts Berlin trains "a track of land north of the Berlin Hauptbahnhof". As does The Guardian: "the Hauptbahnhof". There is no evidence that "central" is being used in anything other than its everyday English sense. To prove central means main station, we would need to find examples of, say, Gare d'Avignon TGV being called "Avignon Central station" or Gare de Champagne-Ardenne TGV being called "Rheims Central station". I note that none of the Beijing stations have been designated "Beijing Central" by Wikipedia (until someone reads this and does so!). I ask those who oppose unambiguous and easy to understand common names this question: should Birmingham New Street railway station be called Birmingham Central, or at least "Birmingham's central station"? Wheeltapper (talk) 12:20, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The Web site of the city of Berlin gives the station's name as "Berlin Central Station." I assume the site uses this form because the tourist office thinks it is the one that potential tourists will understand most easily. They have many years of experience with this issue and they may even have researched it. In it's original and literal meaning, the "central station" was the station that was most centrally located among a city's several stations -- nothing to do the city center. Kauffner (talk) 14:26, 13 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "Assume", "may". Are you suggesting that Deutsche Bahn (who think Berlin Central is a hotel), Eurostar and SNCB have zero experience of the travel market, and messrs Thomas Cook, Lonely Planet and Rough Guide have never done any research into foreign parts? Did the stations in Berlin all move around when Ostbahnhof's name changed? Our of interest, what do you think the airport should be called? Someone who is confused by a station in Berlin having a kraut name is surely going to have real problems with those funny little dots in Berlin Schönefeld Airport! Wheeltapper (talk) 16:32, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Meanwhile in other cities the principle stations of were called Victoria, or Union, or Hauptbahnhof, or Paragon, while non-principle stations were called Central.
 * Comment - I would be happier with this article at main station if it is attempting to be an article on main stations, "central station" is a geographical/locational not functional title in English. As far as use of this article as a WP:POINTY lever to justify not following English sources. That is better dealt with in a RM. In view of Wheeltapper's comments, I have just opened one to restore undiscussed move from Talk:Leipzig Central Station → Leipzig Hauptbahnhof. In ictu oculi (talk) 04:47, 13 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment. Hi IIO. I don't think the article is about main stations in that sense, but about the use of the name "Foo Central Station" or "Foo Central railway station" and its equivalents in other countries. This naming convention is common in English and elsewhere and, it seems to me, that there is a logic behind the naming, even if, in some cases that logic no longer applies to individual cases, e.g. where a station has lost its significance. Of course, as various editors have pointed out, the usage is not identical between countries, but in Europe at least, it is very often the primary station in their city and originally named to disambiguate it from another, lesser, station in the same city. US usage is, of course, different and also needs to be clearly articulated. The history, distribution and usage of these terms, together with lists of the national examples, seems a noteworthy enough subject. What we need is to put better structure and more sources around the article, not least to take account of the valid points made by various editors about the origin and usage of the name in different countries.
 * A separate issue is how we translate station names in other countries. Normally it's easy: "Foo railway station" where "Foo" is the proper name, excluding the foreign word for station. In addition, few seem opposed to the translation of "Foo Central Station" or "Foo Central railway station" where the foreign name literally means "central station". There is an issue where it literally means "main station", but I have argued that, since there are almost no examples in English of "Foo Main Station", that the nearest equivalent is also "Foo Central Station". This is reinforced, in the case of Germany, by the fact that they used the term Zentralbahnhof historically for Hauptbahnhof. There are always going to be awkward exceptions e.g. where the foreign word really means "city centre" (e.g. Zentrum) that is clearly not the same and I would advocate not translating it but leaving it as "Foo Zentrum railway station".
 * Hope that helps. --Bermicourt (talk) 16:09, 13 May 2013 (UTC)


 * We seem to have a lot of examples of where this alleged "convention" doesn't exist, but precious little on where it does exist. It seems we all pretty much agree that the idea that "central = main" has never been true in the UK, Ireland, the USA, Canada or Australia? So the issue is whether in Germany we can say "the word Bar appears in many station names. If we define Bar as meaning Central, then Foo Bar station might be called Foo Central by someone determined not to use the word Bar and not bothered about being understood".
 * Also, if stations called Hauptbahnhof need new names for Wikipedia, do we need "English" names for stations like Fred Street or Under the Lime Trees? Should Hohenzollernplatz (Berlin U-Bahn) become Saxe-Coburg-Gotha Square (Berlin Underground), reflecting the equivalent term for much of the English-speaking world? Wheeltapper (talk) 22:26, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Fred Street indeed; when Eileen Hall translated Emil and the Detectives, in Chapter 2 "The Police Keep Quiet", Zoologischer Garten became Zoological Gardens, but Friedrichstraße merely became Friedrich Street, without going all the way to Frederick Street. -- Red rose64 (talk) 22:47, 13 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Meh - usefulness has never been a required element of notability, but I think it should be. Bearian (talk) 17:00, 13 May 2013 (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.