Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leavenworth (Amtrak Thruway Motorcoach 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. going for delete as merge requires the material being merged to be properly sourced Spartaz Humbug! 06:45, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Leavenworth (Amtrak Thruway Motorcoach station)

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

No indication that the Amtrak Thruway Motorcoach station (ie: bus terminal) is notable under WP:N. - Barek (talk • contribs) - 14:48, 13 October 2009 (UTC)


 *  Keep  Merge into Leavenworth, WA. LEV is just as notable as any other Amtrak station or airport.  Many Amtrak rail stations are both rail and thruway.  In Leavenworth, WA, it's especially important since LWA and LEV are not at the same location.  LWA is only rail and LEV is only bus.  If your notability argument were correct, then we should rip out all airports, train stations and thruway stops.76.104.163.79 (talk) 15:24, 13 October 2009 (UTC) — 76.104.163.79 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * There is a difference; the Leavenworth rail station meets WP:N. However, the only sources I can find for the LEV station are minor trivial mentions and press releases - so it does not meet WP:N. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 15:38, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree. It's not notable enough to be in its own article.  I already merged the information into Leavenworth, Washington.   kgrr  talk 23:27, 17 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete or Merge to Leavenworth, Washington. From what I can find this is simply a bus stop without a shelter that also happens to be served by one long-distance coach route. There are probably thousands of these in the United Kingdom, which is significantly smaller than the Untied States and which has a far less developed long-distance coach network than does the USA. If this were a major bus station, acting as a hub for the local bus network as well as long distance coaches, then it might be notable, but individual bus and coach stops are not. Thryduulf (talk) 16:04, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. Thryduulf (talk) 16:04, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Thryduulf (talk) 16:04, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. The train station is notable and has had plenty of newspaper articles because it's new this year.  The bus stop is a "trivial mention" because it's been there, but it is mentioned in newpapers and press releases.  It is notable *because* the thruway stop is not in the same place as the rail station.  It is no less notable than *thousands* of similar bus stops already in Wikipedia.  See, Adelanto Junction (Amtrak Thruway Motorcoach station), El Segundo (Amtrak Thruway Motorcoach station), or Atascadero - Bus Shelter (Amtrak Thruway Motorcoach station).  So it does not have a shelter.  Neither do many of our rail stops.  Whether it has a shelter or not does not seem to make a rail stop not notable.  Without this Amtrak Thruway stop, the return trip to Seattle is in the middle of the night - the only time that the westbound Empire Builder comes through.  Albeit, there are many non-notable bus stops along the way to Seattle such as Skykomish, WA and Monroe, WA.  The relative size of England versus the US is irrelevant.  Our transportation infrastructure is very different because the US is so dependent on the automobile.  The re-building of a passenger rail network and its associated thruways are notable.  kgrr  talk 16:30, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a valid reason to keep an article. The fact that other articles should likely be reviewed as well does not detract from this one failing to meet inclusion guidelines. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 16:44, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually according to WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS it can go both ways. "Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention but it need not be the main topic of the source material."  Amtrak does list this stop: Amtrak LEV There is another article that is also the main topic of the stop.Leavenworth  However, the article does not mention that the buses can be ticketed under both Northwestern Trailways and Amtrak Thruway Motorcoach That relationship is discussed in the Thruway Motorcoach article.  Wikipedia is full of bus stop articles - most of them with no  references.  This one article has at least two references - the same as the article about the Amtrak rail station.  I don't get your WP:BIAS.  Please explain your WP:Pokémon test  kgrr  talk 01:12, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
 * First: I suggest you reread WP:Pokémon test. I had never seen that essay before; but after reading it, the format of that test/argument clearly more closely matches your arguments.
 * Per WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS: "The nature of Wikipedia means that you cannot make a convincing argument based solely on what other articles do or do not exist; because there is nothing stopping anyone from creating any article". Enough said.
 * As to your quote from WP:N - the LWA has significant coverage from third party reliable sources. The sources listed on the LEV article are clearly trivial mentions - simply listing that it exists.  Being the subject of the page does not in itself make the source "significant coverage", the actual content of the source page must be taken into account. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 22:31, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I am well familiar with the Pokemon test, if I weren't I would not have brought it up to you. Essentially it answers the question of how noteworthy something has to be before it can be included in Wikipedia.  Since they initially did not want to include all 493 Pokemon characters included in Wikipedia, they devised the Pokemon test.  Anything more than the least notable Pokemon character got an article, the rest did not.  Now, each Pokemon, notable or not, has its own Wikipedia page.  I really don't want to see all 500? or so Amtrak Thruway bus stops included in Wikipedia.  After looking at many one line Amtrak bus stop pages, I would recommend that we treat this as WP:LOCAL and include the information into the city or locality of where the stop is located.  I went ahead and merged the important information from this article into Leavenworth, Washington. Since it's done, let's delete this article. kgrr  talk 23:24, 17 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I'd be inclined to Merge into Empire Builder as an auxiliary stop for thruway coaches. Not notable, but possible to list as a stop nevertheless. -- Dennis The Tiger   (Rawr and stuff) 22:05, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * My objection to doing this is this would complicate the Empire Builder article. I would much rather see a list of Thruway Motorcoach stops.   kgrr  talk 01:26, 17 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Merge into Leavenworth (Amtrak station) as an alternate location served by Amtrak connecting services. --NE2 02:08, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I do see precedence of doing this with articles such as the Baker, California article: Baker_(Amtrak_Thruway_Motorcoach_station). kgrr  talk 01:12, 17 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete or Merge into Leavenworth Icicle Station (Amtrak station) or Leavenworth, Washington article(s) per WP:LOCAL. --Triadian (talk) 03:44, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I do see precedence of doing this with articles such as King Street Station (Seattle), Everett Station, Columbia Station (Wenatchee), etc. However, I have a strong objection in doing this in this case because the Amtrak rail station and the bus stop are in opposite ends of town.  There is NO Thruway Motorcoach/Northwestern Trailways connection at the LWA rail station (Leavenworth (Amtrak station) = Leavenworth Icicle Station (Amtrak station)).  kgrr  talk 01:12, 17 October 2009 (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.