Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of bus routes in Ipswich & Woodbridge


 * 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  08:45, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

List of bus routes in Ipswich & Woodbridge

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Primarily Not Notable (Particularly as a collective group) - Not currently sourced (and the only sources available are primary) - Google Keyword Tool reveals that this Term has never been searched for, not only that while it reveals a small number of Google users searched for buses that go from Ipswich to Woodbridge far more searched for the routes of individual bus companies in the area - where this information would be better served (where those companies are themselves notable). Wikipedia is not a travel guide or directory.... Stuart.Jamieson (talk) 10:36, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * As a matter of fact, people in the area are more likely to look for bus routes, as many of the local operators are very minor and non-notable. If you look hard enough, you will find that many of the operators pages have been deleted and the lists of bus routes in the area are actually the only source of bus information and thus should be kept. Adam Mugliston  Talk  12:39, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * "As a matter of fact" - based on what evidence is this a fact? I'm basing my assessment on what Google says people are actually searching for and it says that in the past month no-one searched for a list of bus routes in Ipswich and Woodbridge and only 210 searched for buses from Ipswich to Woodbridge. By contrast Galloway Coaches in Ipswich was searched for close to 600 times. It's also important to note that even more actullly wanted a full timetable and got it from the operator's website. Our own server logs say that over the same month the page averaged 5 hits a day (and most likely at least 2 of them would be web crawlers) and that's not unique visits so every page refresh will count as another one of those hits (it also means I made at least 4 just to nominate the article for deletion) - these aren't the big numbers you're implying exist. Stuart.Jamieson (talk) 14:00, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I am basing this on the fact that I live in the area and see it. How do you know people looking at Galloway were looking for buses? Galloway do a lot of coach hire. Hardly anyone looks for lists of bus routes, people may look for buses in an area and then they can come across a list and if people are looking for buses between two particular points they would;t look at a list. They would look at a list to find where they can go from a particular point. Adam Mugliston  Talk  15:16, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't care whether they were looking for buses or coaches - I do care that Google shows they weren't looking for this list, they never got this list, and that all other reasonably likely search terms put into Google all returned something more useful to them than this list is... Stuart.Jamieson (talk) 15:39, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * As I said before, people don't tend to look for lists, they come across them which helpful for them. Adam Mugliston  Talk  16:18, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Nobody will come here. They will obviously go to Traveline or Suffolk on Board which is an official site not Wikipedia. Wilbysuffolk   Talk to me  16:22, 19 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep Article should be kept because the information is needed and relavent. However, I agree the article is in a sorry state and needs urgent cleanup.  Rcsprinter  (chat)  15:53, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I would like to bring to your attention that a lot of this article's content has been deleted. If an administrator would care to revert that (as I'm assuming they have the powers to) I'm sure that case would be different. Adam Mugliston  Talk  16:18, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Here I was referring to edits made on the 3rd December 2011. Adam Mugliston  Talk  16:23, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:48, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:49, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:49, 9 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete Fails WP:NOTDIR, WP:NOTTRAVEL, WP:PRIMARY. There seems to be a fundamental failure by some editors here to understand the purpose and nature of Wikipedia. It is a tertiary source drawing information from secondary sources. It is not intended to be a guide or directory. Articles should not be based entirely or almost entirely on primary sources. People are better going to the bus companies or local authorities websites for travel information where it is likely to be up to date. There can never be any certainty that a Wiki page is not out of date or vandalised when it is accessed.--Charles (talk) 17:02, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * As I have mention of the Huntingdon AfD, a page I created has never been vandalised. I go back through articles I created when I can, however I also do other things. I also have things outside of Wikipedia to do, yet still I do try to check up on them, so the info being invalid is a small problem. This is a free encyclopaedia, if someone finds a mistake why don't they correct it? Adam Mugliston  Talk  17:10, 9 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep We managed to get rid of articles on individual bus routes by merging them into articles like this. A combined article in tyhis fashion is a good compromise way to cover such topics. A true directory would list each one of them individually with full route descriptions. A true local encyclopedia would give the detailed history of each route, with as pmuch information as could be gotten from archival source  We do neither of these things, nor should we. Articles like this are a good compromise., DGG ( talk ) 02:30, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:NOTDIR, WP:NOTTRAVEL, WP:PRIMARY. Who will look on Wikipedia for bus routes, they would go to traveline. I doubt it will even survive on wika where I edit. Anyway they aren't notable as Huntingdon, Stowmarket, Ely and Harleston pages showed us. 81.135.53.219 (talk) 09:49, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
 * May I just mention that the places you listed do not have particularly large transport system and I am not surprised at the latter 3, considering they were not done well. Adam Mugliston  Talk  21:51, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
 * None where done well and this article has been badly done as well may I just say. Wilbysuffolk   Talk to me  16:18, 19 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 20:21, 17 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete WP:NOTDIR, WP:NOTTRAVEL, WP:NOTEVERYTHING #8. Just because some information is useful to some people is no reason to put it in an encyclopedia. The bus company should have a web page with this list, which the bus company is responsible for keeping up to date. By providing a list of bus routes or bus schedules, we're doing readers a disservice: duplicating authoritative information that is provided elsewhere, possibly providing outdated information. Wikipedia usually appears first in search results, so our providing this list actually interferes with the reader's access to the authoritative source. —Ben Kovitz (talk) 09:23, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete As per above and most of the other comments. List of bus routes don't belong here. People would want to go to an official website not Wikipedia. People will not want to look on Wikipedia for bus routes which official websites such as Traveline have.  Wilbysuffolk   Talk to me  16:15, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete as directory fodder which is better suited on a Wikia site.  coccyx bloccyx  (toccyx)  19:33, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment: I'm not in favor of lists of bus routes, but if this one must go, then we have to look at the entire Category:Lists of bus routes, or worse, Category:Bus routes. There have been many other deletion discussions of articles in these categories, with mixed results. So, we should develop a standard on a categorical, not individual, basis. -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 14:37, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
 * After a large set of these articles started getting no consensus at AfD, there was an RFC which took place on the village pump. The general consensus was that a notability guideline for bus routes was WP:creep but that it might be reasonable to formulate an essay on the notability of routes. It also found that each individual list should be tested at AfD individually -which has happened ever since..Stuart.Jamieson (talk) 15:47, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note also WP:OTHERSTUFF. - The Bushranger One ping only 19:13, 24 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete per all of the above.  Imzadi 1979  →   16:59, 24 May 2012 (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.