Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grand Square Monorail


 * 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. L Faraone  22:12, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Grand Square Monorail

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Project did not materialise, and as such the subject (a failed proposal) is not notable. Paul_012 (talk) 19:56, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Thailand-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 22:21, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 22:25, 19 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep - Failure to materialise is not a reason to delete - a failed, cancelled, or abandoned project is still notable. If it was notable to begin with, it still is - Notability is not temporary. Is there a reliable source stating that this project has been abandoned? - The Bushranger One ping only 22:29, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I disagree that the subject was notable to begin with. In the past few years many plans for mass transit systems in Bangkok have cropped up and died. I don't think mentions of such plans in news sources are enough to establish notability (per WP:NOT). Anyway, I found this news article (in Thai) from Thansettakij back in April saying the planned system was facing legal difficulties and construction would likely be delayed, if authorised at all. (Couldn't find any more recent mentions.) Actually most sources documenting the project seem to have originated form Thansettakij, with only passing mentions in other news sources. Probably this is due its being a private venture. --Paul_012 (talk) 09:24, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Perhaps it should be merged-and-redirected to a Mass transit in Bangkok article, then? - The Bushranger One ping only 19:47, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete unless some one can provide evidence that it will definitely be built soon. WP:CRYSTAL An 800m line with four stations hardly sounds notable anyway.  Peterkingiron (talk) 15:03, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment – See below, and references in the article. The project has not been cancelled, and is estimated to be completed in December 2012. Northamerica1000 (talk) 10:05, 1 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep - Agree with The Bushranger. Even canceled or not-yet-materialized projects can be notable.  The sources do indicate passing our guidelines.  WP:CRYSTAL is about unverified speculation and states so in the first sentence.  There is nothing "unverified" about this proposal.--Oakshade (talk) 23:33, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:09, 26 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep – The project doesn't appear to be cancelled, per Bangkok Post article and this external link. Northamerica1000 (talk) 07:33, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Do note though that those articles are from 2010. --Paul_012 (talk) 18:38, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Sure, the Bangkok Post article was published on July 3, 2010. Here's a quote from it: "If things go as planned, Bangkokians will see the country's first monorail system in the next two to three years." Northamerica1000 (talk) 09:59, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment - From another source in the article, the project hasn't been cancelled: Rama 9 Monorail project to be completed Dec 2012. Northamerica1000 (talk) 10:03, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete I've seen no evidence it was even started. The link above is from September 2010 and says construction was to start last month. There seems to be similar articles. Dougweller (talk) 13:46, 1 January 2012 (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.