Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hest Bank North Junction


 * 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, defaults to keep--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 13:20, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Hest Bank North Junction

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Orphaned articles with no evidence of notability (contested PROD). See discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Railways

I am also nominating the following related pages for the same reason:
 * —  Tivedshambo  (t/c) 07:13, 6 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Merge and redirect somewhere useful like a nearby station or a list of railway junctions in the UK. These appear to be possible search terms. --NE2 07:21, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * It's a junction. That's a piece of railway real estate that exists to join two lines when there's no other reason to build a railway nearby. There is no "nearby station". If there was, we'd have an article of "Hest Bank major metropolis" or somesuch. The nearest relevant station for this would be Morecambe (the junctions exist to connect the Morecambe coast branch onto the main line), and that's far too far a distance away. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:16, 6 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep It's a minimal stub, but it's a real junction, as is the South junction, (check a route map). Are you trying to delete the entire Category:British railway junctions? Andy Dingley (talk) 10:14, 6 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I am fully aware that it is a real junction. I am a real person, but that does not make me notable. If someone can provide significant coverage in reliable secondary sources about these junctions, then I will agree that they are notable, but I don't see any reason why these are any different to most other junctions. I will look at other junctions in due course. — Pek, on behalf of Tivedshambo (talk) 10:39, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Hence my point on the category. Should the entire category be deleted? Hest Bank is the pair of junction(s) (which I presume you accept) serving the line to Morecambe, a fairly large town. There is no notable station or conurbation at Hest Bank. Now if this doesn't meet notability for the group "British railway junctions that aren't otherwise notable as being towns" (i.e. Dovey junction, but not Crewe or Clapham, then what would? Andy Dingley (talk) 12:52, 6 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Can we listify the junction articles (including the short descriptions) in that category and merge this into that list instead? --Polaron | Talk 15:20, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * How would listifying help? The hypothetical question is "Are junctions notable?" (as articles in their own right). If they are, a category is a good way to represent them. If they aren't, they shouldn't be listed. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:36, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Things that might not be sufficiently notable as an individual thing but as a group are often constructed as list articles. An typical individual junction might not be sufficiently notable but junctions as a whole probably are. For most junctions, it would probably be difficult to expand the article beyond a stub so listifying would also help that by combining many stubs into a more substantial article about junctions as a whole. A list is essentially a category where you can add additional information beyond the name of the junction. --Polaron | Talk 15:42, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * "An typical individual junction might not be sufficiently notable but junctions as a whole probably are." I disagree entirely with that. Junctions don't become more notable as groups. Some things do, but not these. Stations of middling size and upwards are notable, as are lines and routes. Individual points and signals clearly aren't. Now where do junctions fit into this? I'm quite happy to see them, as appears to be the status quo, seen as notable and categorizable. This is an inherent property of all junctions between notable lines (as these are) - it's not reduced by the stubbiness of these articles. It might be reduced in the case of a very minor junction, such as two branches of a barely notable branchline, but that's not the issue here. Andy Dingley (talk) 16:24, 6 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Merge (the two articles). On the assumption that the article(s) survive independently of other merges, then what's the consensus on merging Hest Bank North Junction with Hest Bank South Junction to [[Hest Bank Junction]]? It's a triangular junction - they're effectively the same junction anyway. Andy Dingley (talk) 01:01, 7 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Strong delete as not notable. Notability is not asserted, and what's more, not a source to be found. it's not exactly Clapham Junction!! WP is not a playground for bored railfans. Ohconfucius (talk) 21:57, 7 August 2008 (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.