Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cross-Harbour Bus Route 112


 * 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 redirect to List of bus routes in Hong Kong. The consensus is clearly for either delete or redirect, with the two keep !votes being of the OSE variety. No harm in the redirect. (non-admin closure)  Onel 5969  TT me 21:10, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Cross-Harbour Bus Route 112

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Another un-notable bus route, one of thousands. Article is also unreferenced. MB 15:45, 4 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep While it clearly isn't the most important article in the encyclopaedia, there are many others like it and it is a beautiful example of its type. Harmless and charming. —  A L T E R C A R I  ✍ 14:13, 5 June 2017 (UTC)


 * WP:ILIKEIT. Nördic   Nightfury  16:18, 5 June 2017 (UTC)


 * , the passage you linked to is about liking the topic or subject, and arguing that the article about that subject should be kept for that reason. Oddly enough, I don't have much of a subjective opinion – positive or negative – on the subject of Cross-Harbour Bus Route 112. That said, I see no reason to get rid of this article. —  A L T E R C A R I  ✍ 17:17, 5 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:01, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:02, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Asia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:02, 4 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete as non notable. Nördic   Nightfury  16:18, 5 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete The article does not establish notability and reads more like a timetable than a Wikipedia article.TH1980 (talk) 01:29, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. This article conforms to the standard of other bus route articles on Wikipedia, encompassing both the history of the route and current service pattern. See London Buses route 23 and Template:London bus routes for example. Deryck C. 18:53, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Are you able to provide sources for any information on the page? As it stands, there are no sources at all on the article, hence the reason it has been nominated for deletion. As you stated, the London Bus article you referenced is an example of a good article, but it isn't written to the same quality as the nomination. Nördic   Nightfury  09:34, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Sourcing is a more serious issue. This tool has some info. The Chinese version has one citation and a handful of external links that may be useful. —  A L T E R C A R I   ✍ 13:11, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Redirect to List of bus routes in Hong Kong (with the history preserved under the redirect), where the bus route is already mentioned, in lieu of deletion. I was unable to find significant coverage in reliable sources about the subject. I support preserving the history under the redirect so the content can be reused for a merge to articles like List of bus routes in Hong Kong or so the redirect can be easily undone if editors find significant coverage about the subject. Cunard (talk) 06:54, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Jupitus Smart  10:35, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Redirect as per above. I would not expect any bus routes to be notable, unless maybe the first route ever or some other historical relevance. pseudonym Jake Brockman talk 16:51, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per TH1980. Bus routes are generally non-notable. As a second choice, redirect per Cunard. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 21:05, 11 June 2017 (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.