Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hanover Square 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 Delete all. Consensus is that none of the topics meet the general notability guidelines due to WP:CRYSTAL. -- Jreferee    t / c  07:33, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Hanover Square Station

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This is a non-existent New York City Subway station. It is proposed to be a part of the Second Avenue Subway, but construction is neither started, nor scheduled, nor funded. The current forecasted completion date is 2020, but as there is no funding, this is merely a guess. If it is built, it would be many years from now. There have been various Second Avenue Subway proposals since the 1920s, of which this is merely the most recent. Nothing verifiable or notable can be said about the station until construction (if it happens) gets much closer. See WP:NOT Marc Shepherd 13:20, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

I am also nominating the following related pages for the identical reasons:
 * -- Marc Shepherd 13:26, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete all per WP:CRYSTAL. If construction isn't even funded, then how do we know it will be built?  NA SC AR Fan 24 (radio me!) 13:35, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete all: NN until it becomes closer to construction (WP:CBALL). - Rjd0060 14:17, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete all WP:CRYSTAL /Blaxthos 16:18, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete all per nom. --Sc straker 17:37, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete all per above. STORMTRACKER   94  17:39, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Redirect all to Second Avenue Subway, per Rjd0060's reasons for deletion. DanTD 18:15, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Redirects are unnecessary in this case. Nothing else links to these articles, or is likely to, except for Second Avenue Subway itself. They don't even follow the correct naming convention for New York City Subway articles. Marc Shepherd 20:49, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Second Avenue Subway per DanTD. The nominator practically makes a case of inverse notability given the numerous proposals dating as far back as the 1920s.  RFerreira 00:14, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
 * The notability is of some kind of subway proposal on Second Avenue, not of those hypothetical stations. Marc Shepherd 11:09, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep While the Second Avenue Subway is not to completed to at least 2020, there has been more progress in recent years and federal funding has been commmitted to the project. This should be kept as part of expecting the new subway line. Empire2000 02:11, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment There is Federal funding committed only for Phase 1, which includes none of the stations that are the subject of this AfD. Marc Shepherd 23:04, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete all per WP:CBALL, as there is no guarantee that it will ever be built.--Voxpuppet (talk • contribs) 02:48, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep The Second Avenue Subway may have an uncertain status, but many non-existing stations with uncertain status have articles such as the MTR Ho Man Tin, Tamar, Exhibition and Whampoa Garden. The Ho Man Tin, Tamar, Exhibition and Whampoa stations are part of projects that are not yet funded or are under construction. The Second Avenue Subway is under construction and construction may be more certain. Therefore, keep all. --User:HManat23 —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 22:03, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Too speculative and too far in the future. Edison 02:49, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Second Avenue Subway. "Hanover Square Station" is by no means an implausible or unreasonable search term (our naming conventions are just a Wikipedia standard), and if anyone searches for that, they should be sent to the article where the topic is covered. At present, the station is too far off into the future to be sure that the station will certainly be built. Sjakkalle (Check!)  06:18, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Second Avenue Subway per Sjakkalle, not to mention our well-established WP:REDIRECT guidelines.  Bur nt sau ce  16:11, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Second Avenue Subway per Sjakkalle, not to mention our well-established WP:REDIRECT guidelines.  Bur nt sau ce  16:11, 8 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. An article about a station that doesn't even exist yet is crazy. Plus, I agree that it is not in accordance with WP:CRYSTAL, and it is not even in favor of the project naming convention. I may support a redirect, but I don't think it is all that necessary. —User: (talk • contribs • email) 18:39, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Well, if you allow articles like the Tamar Station or Ho Man Tin Station to be allowed, why not these? They may be indefinite, but look people, the Tamar Station and the Exhibition Station is too far into the horizon. Hong Kong may cancel the projects, meaning that these stations won't be built. Now let's look back at the Second Avenue Subway. The people saying delete are too ignorant of what is happening. The SAS is under construction, while projects out there in the other side of the world that have pages about proposed stations may not occur because of funding. We could say the Hanover Sq station, Seaport and Chatham Sq are proposed, but not entirely cut out from the project or cancelled. Yes, the SAS has a history of delays and bureaucratic red tape, but it doesn't mean, you could be so myopic to just say delete to pages that talk about stations that are proposed. Now I want EVERY ONE OF YOU to go the MTA's Capital Construction page and go to Second Avenue Subway and read the documents. And you will see it is proposed and is closer to the horizon than you think. To Imdanumber1, you are crazy. "An article about a station that doesn't exist is crazy!" YOU ARE SO MYOPIC! DO YOU USE WIKIPEDIA? Look at how many stations that have pages yet they are under construction or proposed. I live in New York City since I was born. I doubt anyone of you are New Yorkers. And even if you are, you are too ignorant to study mass transportation projects. Now go to the future transportation list, and look at proposed projects and proposed stations or infrastructures. This is not a joke. To Voxpuppet, you are in Britain, what do you know about New York? Wikipedia is for people to learn about things, past, present and future. We must provide as much as we know to the world to serve the world. Then why do we have Wikipedia? And what about abandoned subway stations? They don't serve the public, they don't exist on a regular revenue map,but why are they there?-User:HManat23


 * 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.