Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Corning (Amtrak 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. W.marsh 14:05, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Corning (Amtrak station)
AfDs for this article: 
 * – (View AfD) (View log)

I couldn't see anything in this article that makes this particular train station noteworthy. Wikipedia is not a directory, and that's part of what it would become if every bus station had its own article. Previously nominated for speedy delete per CSD A7 (no assertion of notability) - tag was removed by an article editor. &mdash; KieferSkunk (talk) &mdash; 01:41, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * For some reason, train stations are considered notable per WP:OUTCOMES and many AFDs in the past. Hopefully WP:CCC on that consensus and Delete as nn train station with no independent, and reliable sources to back it up. See WP:RS This is a Secret account 01:49, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Every railway station in the UK, as far as I am aware, has its own Wiki entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_railway_stations_-_A and including ones that only see about 30 passengers a day: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspley_Guise_railway_station Duke of Whitstable 02:49, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep This article is thorough and concise, providing adequate sources to support the WP:OUTCOMES accepted consensus on notability. Alansohn 03:47, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * The first two sources aren't independent of the subject, and just trivial info, the third one is borderline spam, how is that adequate This is a Secret account 03:55, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Update I have added a fourth reference.--MrFishGo Fish 16:23, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Question: If this station article is just like other articles that only have one paragraph about them, how does that keep Wikipedia from becoming a directory? It would seem to make more sense to combine these into regional articles that list or summarize the stations, and call out particularly notable examples (largest ridership, smallest ridership, historical significance, etc.) without having to include them all. &mdash; KieferSkunk (talk) &mdash; 04:21, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep--Notable because it is the center of public transportation in Corning. Now has sufficient sources.--MrFishGo Fish 16:35, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete: I don't really care about old statistics. This train station isn't notable.  It is just there. - Rjd0060 05:09, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep and source better --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 06:15, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - This is a transportation center of the north Central Valley (California) that's also a Greyhound station as well as a hub for many local routes. --Oakshade 07:25, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Oakshade. Railway stations make up nodes of the transportation infrastructure. Paper encyclopedias have articles about railway stations smaller than this (Hallingskeid for example). Sjakkalle (Check!)  07:54, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: But what is it about those train stations that makes them noteworthy? Is there some historical significance to their existence?  Some statistic that makes them stand out?  Do these paper encyclopedias list every bus and train station in the country?  Or do they discuss the lines (Greyhound, Amtrak, etc.) and particularly noteworthy stations? &mdash; KieferSkunk (talk) &mdash; 19:03, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Comparing WP to paper is not an actionable argument for deletion (or for inclusion, for that matter). I will concede that the article as it stands now includes very little to assert the subject's notability; however, looking at the photo on the article, I see railroad tracks in the background, so it seems likely to me that this station may have been originally built by a railroad to directly serve passenger trains on that track. I haven't found information in my own reference library yet, so I can't verify this theory right now.  Slambo (Speak)  11:56, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
 * According to unreferenced material that used to be in this article before I removed it, the station was never a train station--it was built in 1998 as a bus station. However, it was built next to train tracks in the hope that the San Joaquins would someday be extended to serve this station.  In summary, it was never a train station, but it may become one in the future.--MrFishGo Fish 16:08, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete sorry but this is just a small station. Definitely not notable.  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 12:14, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Note that this isn't an actual train station since no scheduled passenger trains stop there. Amtrak utilizes this transportation center for several of their Thruway Motorcoaches. --Oakshade 16:29, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete no claim of notability. JJL 18:51, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Notification left at WikiProject Trains and WikiProject Stations. Slambo (Speak) 12:27, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Oakshade and Sjakkalle. Furthermore, notability is not and never has been a criteria for deletion. Mackensen (talk) 12:30, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
 * But issue with sources is one of the major concerns, and no one met that concern yet. This is a Secret account 16:38, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment WP:SNOW that this will be anything other than no-consensus, it seems Duke of Whitstable 22:35, 10 November 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.