Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of bus lines in Kolkata


 * 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. The policy-based "not a directory" arguments are not adequately addressed by the "keep" opinions.  Sandstein  08:10, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

List of bus lines in Kolkata

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Per WP:NOT, specifically WP:NOTDIRECTORY – Wikipedia is not a directory. This is just a long list of different bus lines. There are no sources whatsoever, making it nearly impossible to know what is true and what is not. Amccann421 &#160; (talk) 18:47, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 18:58, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 18:59, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Uanfala (talk) 20:14, 6 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep There's definitely a case to be made against having lists of public transport bus routes, but I'm agnostic on this general matter. There seem to be though. I'm willing to change my mind if someone comes up with a cogent argument why we should delete this article while keeping Lists of bus routes in New York City, List of bus routes in London and all the rest. Uanfala (talk) 20:44, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
 * WP:Other stuff exists is not a good argument at AfD.Charles (talk) 14:11, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I knew this would be brought up. The rationale behind WP:Other stuff exists, as I understand it, is that articles should be judged on their own merits: there are other articles like this one, and each of them can be challenged on its own and deleted. I agree with that, but we all know List of bus routes in London isn't going to get deleted, even though WP:NOTDIR applies to it in equal measure. It's not a bad thing to keep in mind the big picture and as the essay you link to itself says "other stuff exists arguments can be valid or invalid. When used correctly, these comparisons are important as the encyclopedia should be consistent in the content that it provides or excludes". Uanfala (talk) 23:55, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
 * We do not know that List of bus routes in London is not going to be deleted at some point.Charles (talk) 07:55, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * London list is basically a list of entries in the Category:Bus routes in London which hence fits standalone criteria. Here there are no standalone articles on each routes that needs to be clubbed in a list form. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 07:38, 12 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep When looking at if a public transportation system should be kept, I tend to look at the size of the city. It has over 4 million people, so in my opinion this is a keep. ThePlatypusofDoom (Talk) 22:08, 6 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment I agree with the concern about this article, as it needs a lot of maintenance to prevent is from becoming a long list of very detailed bus routes. The Banner talk 18:09, 7 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep There can be arguments on the "lists of things" line but there simply does not exist a page of this nature on the Internet despite it being a city of more than 10 million (I am from this city). This has been only made possible by the "user contributed" nature of Wikipedia where users probably spotted the bus routes and added. Although this might not be the ideal way to do it, but this has really become a useful page for public knowledge and use. So I prefer Keeping it and may be contacting different agencies (a Himalayan task given nature of working of the bureaucracy) to verify sources of information in the coming days.

Source of information: Regarding the lists of things, I cannot give more argument as people are tending toward a question of taste rather than the usefulness of the information. However, I have made a little progress with respect to the sources for bus lines run by the Calcutta State Tranport Corporation. Please check if this type of sourcing is adequate and comment. CSTC non-ac bus routes CSTC AC bus routes CTC Bus routes

Also please consider that there are many Regional/State Transport Authority (STA/RTA) that issue permits for these lines which might not have an online presence-for those cases, if we have emails/ snail mails from those authorities confirming the route details, will that do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Devpro1981 (talk • contribs) 06:33, 10 May 2016 (UTC) Devpro1981 (talk) 12:04, 8 May 2016 (UTC)DevPro1981
 * You seem to be saying that Wikipedia should a vehicle for original research. As things stand it is not.Charles (talk) 14:11, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
 * H: They seem to be rather saying that the article is OR in its present form. Uanfala (talk) 23:55, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Devpro1981 (talk) 04:27, 9 May 2016 (UTC)Devpro1981
 * Keep Also the page contains lists of all bus lines which covers districts other than Kolkata. This makes the details unnecessarily long and detailed. We can consider separate pages for bus routes for different districts by spinning off from this page.
 * I've struck this second "keep" as duplicative of your comment above. You can add further comments to the discussion, but not additional !votes. postdlf (talk) 19:37, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep . I can totally understand what is complaining about. I was shocked to see that the list is PC protected for "additional of unsourced/poorly sourced content" when nothing there is sourced. However, I think we should hang on to it. If nothing else, it'll give someone (like me) a starting point when they try to rewrite the article. –Compassionate727 (T·C) 14:02, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I no longer hold to the position which I did earlier, though it is not because my reasoning has been refuted. I leave it there for you to look at and consider. –Compassionate727 (T·C) 21:13, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOTDIR and WP:OR.Charles (talk) 14:11, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete No independent references have been provided for the list or for information about routes. The routes don't link to any articles. Similar lists have been deleted. Bus services in large cities are likely to be more notable but evidence is still needed for that notability. 82.132.186.32 (talk) 20:09, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment The sources which have been inserted above are just the transport company websites, primary sources. That is where the public should go to find travel information, not a Wiki article which is likely to be outdated. Wikipedia articles should not depend wholly or mainly on primary sources. Significant secondary coverage is required to establish notability.Charles (talk) 08:08, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your opinion on the sourcing. What are your thoughts on the possible online unavailability of the information? In that case, the public will not have any site to find information on the routes run by those transport authorities. Another point is, the bus routes don't get changed very often . So we can keep the content of the article as it is for the time being, possibly reformatting/refactoring for better readability; working simultaneously to reach out to the RTAs/STAs to gather authentic details of the routes. Also I wonder, how the content in its present form came into being (may we hear from the major contributor(s) to this article?) as this is most accurate and up to date than any other content available for this topic by doing a Google search ("kolkata bus routes"). Devpro1981 (talk) 14:18, 10 May 2016 (UTC)Devpro1981
 * What part of WP:NOTGUIDE or WP:NOTTRAVEL do you not understand?Charles (talk) 08:41, 11 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete -- Bus routes (unlike railway lines) are liable to be changed at frequent intervals. Accordingly the article needs regular maintenance, which WP cannot guarantee.  The appropriate place to look is on a website maintained by the operators or the licensing authority, who will be paid to keep it up to date, or at least have an incentive to do so.  Peterkingiron (talk) 14:34, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * What you are referring to is the ideal situation and will probably happen someday; but being a resident of the city, I can tell that no such initiative to update the web sites by the different licensing authorities (other than the reference links already collected) are taking place and there is no news of such things in the foreseeable future. So my point is, why delete a good compilation of information that is more factually correct than any other such compilation on the web and the possibility of change (refer supporting link) for this city is not very high.Devpro1981 (talk) 05:52, 11 May 2016 (UTC)Devpro1981


 * Delete per and . –Compassionate727 (T·C) 14:38, 10 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete per my comment above and NOTDIR, NOTTRAVELGUIDE. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 07:38, 12 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete per the above as well as per NOTDIR, NOTTRAVEL - All this crap belongs on a bus enthusiast website .... not an eneyclopedia!. – Davey 2010 Talk 23:00, 12 May 2016 (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.