Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Community of Metros


 * 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. WP:NPASR. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 03:06, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Community of Metros

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable subject, article history is unsourced. The bulk of citations refer to a single meeting held in 2016. Information about metro membership is outdated at the time of this AfD request. This article needs a lot of work if it is to be kept.  Cards   84664   00:27, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.   Cards   84664   00:27, 2 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Disagree. The article remains a relevant topic especially in the metro system/transportation area. No need for deletion nomination. I will be improving and updating the content of this article in the next few days to improve its relevancy. There are a lot of good academic journals/articles that CoMET has done in terms of benchmark and standard setting. Majority of the world's biggest subway systems belong to this benchmarking group along with NOVA. Jjj84206 (talk) 01:02, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 03:10, 4 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep I have taken time to update all the information to 2020 with reliable, verifiable, and neutral citations. The article is now relevant including the member list being up-to-date. The benchmarking methodology is clearly outlined, along with the new objectives of the organization. This is also a notable subject as it's the only credible metro benchmarking group that encompass most metro systems in the world. The benchmarking are credible and very detailed, conducted by neutral organization under Imperial College London (not by individual metro companies). I believe this article adds significant value and all notable metro systems site itself as a member of NOVA or CoMET. Jjj84206 (talk) 15:10, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
 * In the history section, Tokyo Metro is listed as joining in 1996, even though they just joined this year. The individual mentions of members joining need citations too.  Cards   84664   16:00, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I made the requested edit. The history section is mainly from CoMET's official website. Tokyo may have quit and recently rejoined in 2020. They did indeed join back in 1996. Please let me know what other edits you suggest. Otherwise, I think we have raised the level of this article to Wikipedia standards. Thank you for your hard work and contribution.Jjj84206 (talk) 02:56, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 13:39, 9 April 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   08:54, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment The history section still needs to be updated with reliable secondary sources.  Cards   84664   13:02, 17 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment my recommendation would be to delete the entire history section. While it produces many important research articles for transportation area, no one really cares a lot about its history and formation. We care about its bench-marking methodology and the research findings. This should mitigate all the problems.Jjj84206 (talk) 23:22, 18 April 2020 (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.