Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Least used railway stations in Great Britain


 * 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.  Sandstein  20:41, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Least used railway stations in Great Britain

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The page is just a complete mess. There is just too much original research in compiling a list of least-used stations for each county. There are plenty of anomalies with ORR's railway statistics but it doesn't mean that it is least-used. One of ORR's old railway statistics shows Luton Airport Parkway railway station at 6 entries and exits in the 1997-1998 statistics when Luton Airport Parkway hasn't even opened until November 1999. It also shows Dunston railway station at 146 entries and exits and Newark Castle railway station at 351 entries and exits and Moorgate station at 490 entries and exits. Whilst ORR's statistics might be more accurate today; it wasn't very accurate 20 years ago. Citing ORR from 20 years ago is not a reliable source as there were a lot of anomalies at that time but a substantial amount of the article cites an unreliable source to say that they are least-used. I feel that this article needs to be deleted or complete rewritten again. Pkbwcgs (talk) 08:29, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Pkbwcgs (talk) 08:29, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Pkbwcgs (talk) 08:29, 17 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete. Per my comments here, this a legitimate topic, but trying to clean out the original research, personal commentary, and inappropriate sourcing would take more time and effort than rewriting a compliant article from scratch. &#8209; Iridescent 08:36, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. Listcruft and the definitions as to what constitutes use are problematic. —МандичкаYO 😜 09:01, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. I can see there might perhaps be some merit in an article about little-used stations nationally seeing as it's a topic that provokes some interest and media coverage, however this article seems to prioritise the county where each station resides over any other factors which seems pretty arbitrary to me (and frankly bizarre in the case of Rutland, which only has one station). I think the article as it stands needs to go, but I'd certainly be open to it being re-created in a more appropriate form in the future. &mdash;  Gas Head Steve [TALK] 09:23, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. I think the topic itself is borderline notable, as there is some coverage on the top few least-used stations at sources such as and . But per the above comments there's way too much info in this current incarnation, particularly the "by county" list, which looks like WP:SYNTH because reliable sources haven't categorised them that way. Overall I think this concept should be mentioned somewhere, with a redirect, but per WP:NOPAGE does not have enough material to warrant its own page.  &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 11:54, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 07:32, 19 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Stubify, partly per - Think that an article on least used stations in the UK would be notable, but we don't need a list of them.   Alex Noble    - talk  16:27, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. Railcruft. Lamberhurst (talk) 09:22, 24 February 2020 (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.