Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of bus routes in Lahore


 * 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 keep without prejudice to the renomination of individual list articles. There is a clear consensus here that lists of bus routes can be notable and so future discussions should address why a specific list is or is not. Thryduulf (talk) 02:54, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

List of bus routes in Lahore

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Bus routes are subject to change and aren't permanent thing like public transit systems. We aren't travel guide, nothing encyclopedic about these articles. Other problems are that none of following list have their own article on 'route' or 'station' so we can convert to navigation list. This comes under WP:NOTGUIDE, WP:LISTCRUFT. Störm  (talk)  15:18, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

I am also nominating the following related pages:
 * Störm  (talk)  15:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Störm  (talk)  15:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Störm  (talk)  15:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Störm  (talk)  15:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Störm  (talk)  15:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Störm  (talk)  15:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Störm  (talk)  15:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Störm  (talk)  15:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Störm  (talk)  15:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Störm  (talk)  15:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Störm  (talk)  15:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Störm  (talk)  15:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Störm  (talk)  15:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Störm  (talk)  15:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Störm  (talk)  15:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Störm  (talk)  15:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Störm  (talk)  15:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Störm  (talk)  15:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Störm  (talk)  15:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Störm  (talk)  15:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Störm  (talk)  15:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Störm  (talk)  15:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Störm  (talk)  15:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Störm  (talk)  15:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Störm  (talk)  15:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Störm  (talk)  15:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep -- There are many lists of bus routes on WP. Just take a look at Category:Lists_of_bus_routes.  There wouldn't be so many of these if they weren't understood to be notable.  I recommend that nominator withdraw this nomination and go seek consensus for getting rid of everything in that category if it really seems necessary.  A deletion discussion is not the place to try to settle what's clearly a policy issue.192.160.216.52 (talk) 15:48, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Very interesting. I instead urge you to go and turn this WP:NOTGUIDE into WP:GUIDE so we can turn our encyclopedia into travel guide (which would be very helpful and would make your daily travel easy). You can also use WikiVoyage and WikiTravel btw. Störm   (talk)  16:13, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 16:42, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 16:42, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 16:42, 6 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep nominator fails on two points: lists of bus routes are not WP:NOTTRAVEL nor are they WP:LISTCRUFT. For NOTTRAVEL, a list of bus routes is not something you would normally find in a travel guide of, say, Lahore; the guide may tell you to take a certain bus to a certain attraction, which would violate WP:NOTTRAVEL, but I've never seen complete public transit information in an travel guide. Furthermore, it's not crufty since transportation authorities are notable, and the routes they provide are discriminate and non-trivial. There have been policy discussions about bus routes and while I think probably 99% of bus routes don't deserve their own article, I have no problem with a list of bus routes for notable transportation authorities, since it's likely the list will be notably/reliably sourced, which I think is the case here. SportingFlyer  talk  17:17, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment -- See WP:BUSOUTCOMES, which states: Articles about individual bus routes are rarely notable; recommendations to merge into a suitable list article are common. If these list articles weren't notable, why is the common outcome that articles on individual bus routes ought to be merged into them?192.160.216.52 (talk) 17:22, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * At the top, it is written that It is intended to make up for a deficiency considered overly detailed for inclusion in the page(s) it supplements. This page is not one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community.
 * Funny, that's exactly what it says at the top of WP:LISTCRUFT, which you cited as a reason for deletion. What's your point? 192.160.216.52 (talk) 17:37, 6 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment - See recent consensus Articles for deletion/List of bus routes in Multan. Clearly, Wikipedia isn't DIRECTORY. Neither page has reliable sources to verify these very dynamic routes and aren't useful for any encyclopedia (I don't think Britannica Encyclopaedia will ever have such type of articles. I know we are different as we are online). Störm   (talk)  17:26, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * , who participated in previous AfD.  Störm   (talk)  17:30, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Now you're canvassing for delete votes? Give me a break, read WP:CANVAS, and stop doing it.192.160.216.52 (talk) 17:33, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * What a dishonest comment that is. See these consensuses:, , .  And so what?192.160.216.52 (talk) 17:35, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * ,, To avoid issues of canvass I will ping everyone from those three related AfD's; AFD1, AFD2, AFD3: -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  - SineBot  -  -  -  -  -  - AnomieBOT -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  --- Prince of Thieves (talk) 18:26, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * How in the world do you think that's going to help? I just found those three keeps, and the nominator found a couple deletes, but there's no way to tell if nom's examples are representative, if my examples are representative, or if the union of the !voters on the two sets is representative.  You're also canvassing, and I don't apove of it even if it makes the outcome of this discussion more likely to be one of which I do approve. 192.160.216.52 (talk) 18:31, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * By informing all of the participants, I am not making a biased or subjective opinion on who should be informed or not, and having additional comments from interested contributions is good, I have seen it written before that if informing people from a prior AfD, you should inform all of them. Though pinging two bots was not needed (oops). Prince of Thieves (talk) 18:41, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * You might not be making a biased selection, but the nom made a biased selection of deletion discussions for one purpose, then I made a biased selection of some other discussions to counter nom's selection. The union of two biased selections is not an unbiased selection, it's another biased selection.  The fact that you took a biased selection and chose all members of it doesn't make it any less biased.  This is basic Sampling theory. Probably this AfD is FUBAR at this point and nom should withdraw it. 192.160.216.52 (talk) 18:51, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * The premise of trying to draw comparisons between List of bus routes in Hong Kong] and [[Sabaragamuwa Province (Sri Lanka) bus routes is hard enough anyway, this is clearly an attempt to make new policy (ie. a consensus that all articles which are lists of bus routes are deleted). So I am perfectly allowed to inform everyone that may be interested that I can find. Prince of Thieves (talk) 19:00, 6 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep there's so much variation here it's hard to speak in generalities. But I think the combined notability of for example, all the bus routes in Hong Kong is enough to pass notability. And Wikipedia has plenty of directories in it. Prince of Thieves (talk) 17:31, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete all per nominator. None of the bus routes in any of the lists are notable and none of them have any encyclopedic purpose other than to be used a s a travel guide. If someone wanted to find out bus route information they should be going to the transport authority's official website. Not here. Ajf773 (talk) 17:58, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * — Note: An editor has expressed a concern that Ajf773 (talk • contribs) has been canvassed to this discussion. 192.160.216.52 (talk) 18:22, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * The nominator is perfectly within their rights to notify other users to AfD discussions - this provides a broader consensus. I have two of the articles concerned on my watchlist as well as Deletion sorting/Lists so there is zero chance I would have missed this one. Ajf773 (talk) 18:51, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Give me a break. The nominator notified two people who !voted delete on one single AfD.  That's clearly canvassing whether you would have missed it otherwise or not. 192.160.216.52 (talk) 18:53, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Rubbish. I follow these types of transport articles all the time and regularly engage in debates. Stop having a whinge because some people aren't on your side. Ajf773 (talk) 20:01, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Since the only two canvassed editors !voted delete, you actually have no evidence concerning what I'm having a whinge over, to use your inappropriately personalized terminology. 192.160.216.52 (talk) 20:05, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Or you could just get an account like every other serious user. Ajf773 (talk) 00:19, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * What an extraordinarily unfalsifiable statement that is! Since you have no way of knowing which IP editors are the same as which other IP editors, you have no way to know whether or not any given IP editor is serious.  I admit that it's possible to tell if an IP editor is not serious, but not if one's serious.  Why don't you stop hiding behind your username and edit as an IP like other serious editors? 192.160.216.52 (talk) 13:38, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * It's quite simple. An IP can remain anonymous and can change their address from time to time. Which is why they get blocked from protected articles. I have nothing to hide by having an authentic user name. Ajf773 (talk) 17:44, 7 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete - Many "List of bus routes in X" become outdated, I've witnessed a good 3-4 bus routes here that haven't been updated in over 5 years (This was years ago mind), Back in 2014 myself and others had deleted well over 100 UK bus route articles because of notability and reliability issues, My common perception of these have been "If one wants to view a bus service route then they should visit that operators website" .... Ofcourse we're an encyclopedia and so we should cover all sorts of topics but unfortunately with these types of articles bus routes are never reported on and unfortunately many bus timetable cites all become dead,
 * I personally believe these all fail NOTDIRECTORY in that we're essentially providing a bus timetable (many have times, prices etc) (There's disagreement over whether these actually fail NOTDIR but I personally believe they do), These also IMHO fail GNG because of the lack of sources etc,
 * And before someone screams "WE HAVE LIST OF BUS ROUTES IN LONDON SO YOU'RE BIASED!!!!!!" ... Yeah I personally think that should go too!, Anyway IMHO fails NOTDIR & GNG. – Davey 2010 Talk 19:14, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * — Note: An editor has expressed a concern that Davey2010 (talk • contribs) has been canvassed to this discussion. 192.160.216.52 (talk) 19:40, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Pinging editors who have participated in previous transport and bus-related AFDs is NOT canvassing, Might I suggest you drop the stick ?, You !voted Keep so shut up and allow others to have their say. – Davey 2010 Talk 19:49, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * No stick involved, friend. I expressed a concern is all I did.  Why don't you let me express my concerns, you express your concerns, and the Wiki will roll on. 192.160.216.52 (talk) 20:05, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Can I express my concern that your concern was completely unfounded? Since when is recruiting editors to disagree with your position considered a violation of WP:CANVASS? Prince of Thieves (talk) 20:21, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Because those aren't concerns - They're you attempting to have these articles kept regardless ..... But as for the whole CANVASS thing there's 2 points to this - One is that pinging previous AFD participants is absolutely fine, The other point is that Prince himself !voted Keep .... So I'm sure if Prince wanted to canvass then I or others wouldn't be here now..... – Davey 2010 Talk 22:01, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * It looks like you're trying to graft some kind of intentionality element onto WP:CANVAS. I don't see that the canvasser's intention matters at all.  The point is that if people are going to be pinged their names ought to be selected in an unbiased way.  That didn't happen here.  192.160.216.52 (talk) 13:45, 7 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep - I was hoping the whole striking one by one wasn't going to happen .... but it has ..... So now we're at that stage it's simply easier to nominate them one by one (which is what you really should've done in the first place). – Davey 2010 Talk 14:52, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep – As per above. Also, we don't not have articles on things just because information about those things changes periodically. That's just completely ridiculous. —Joeyconnick (talk) 19:26, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete Per nom. There is no encyclopedic value and is simply acting as a travel guide. If, however, there is content, supported by secondary sources, related to the change in routes, etc. then it would be work keeping that content (and only that content). Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:29, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep – for reasons mentioned above. If deletion is determined, I would like to Userfy List of bus routes in Metro Vancouver. Northwest (talk) 22:15, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * SNOW Keep (for the major cities at least) - (Thanks for the ping) We have many bus route list articles on Wikipedia that have been well established for years, so this sudden nomination of a whole load of them is completely absurd. I strongly suggest that the nominator withdraws their nomination, or remove the list of bus routes of major cities from the nomination. Class 455  ( talk |stand clear of the doors!)  22:41, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Some of them DO deserve to be deleted though, as per the nominator's rationale. We should at least attempt to narrow down the obvious deletes, to the maybes, to the keeps. Ajf773 (talk) 22:45, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Agreed, The Sri Lankan province ones are non notable, but all the lists from cities such as Singapore, Hong Kong, Calgary, Edmonton etc are all notable and shouldn't have been nominated in the first place.  Class 455  ( talk |stand clear of the doors!)  22:57, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Done. What are your thoughts for remaining ones. Störm   (talk)  03:54, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * — Note: An editor has expressed a concern that Class455 (talk • contribs) has been canvassed to this discussion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.160.216.52 (talk) 13:31, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * what the hell is wrong with you? You’ve been been told numerous amount of times that a ping is not canvassing. Please read WP:CANVASS before you make such statements. Class 455  ( talk |stand clear of the doors!)  17:04, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * thank you for listening, I think that Bangkok, Kuala Lumpur, the Chinese cities (bar Taichung) Calgary and Winnipeg should be kept, the other ones should be deleted, since Provinces are not as notable as cities. Class 455  ( talk |stand clear of the doors!)  17:04, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Claiming that lists for cities are more notable than lists for provinces is merely your opinion, without any basis in policy.Charles (talk) 22:02, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * WP:N, WP:GNG??? Class 455  ( talk |stand clear of the doors!)  11:22, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
 * No. Notability is not inherited from the cities.Charles (talk) 15:07, 8 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep this proposal would wipe out a huge amount of meterial. It's also not clear why these routes were nominated and other lists of bus routes ignored. Several of these pages provide a good overview to travel options which you would not get by having to search through web sites for all the bus operators in a city. A more constructive approach would be to discuss this in each Talk pages with a view to improving content, and failing that then possibly nominating the list for deletion. Teraplane (talk) 23:43, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment this AfD needs to be deletion sorted into a lot more categories than they currently are - does anyone mind if I do this, or should I refrain since I've already voted? SportingFlyer  talk  01:02, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Go ahead, I suggest as Pakistan is already included to add all the other countries related to the lists. Ajf773 (talk) 01:43, 7 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete all. These have no encyclopedic purpose. We are not a travel guide.Tvx1 02:05, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * — Note: An editor has expressed a concern that Tvx1 (talk • contribs) has been canvassed to this discussion. 192.160.216.52 (talk) 13:33, 7 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep - apart from anything else, too many lists of different standards bundled together: at the very least, there should have been individual discussions on the obscure ones. Also, as pointed out above, WP:NOTGUIDE doesn't apply. A time-wasting nomination Eustachiusz (talk) 03:06, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep - There are notable bus routes in quite a few of these lists, confirmed by either third party references that are already included in the lists or that can be found. Examples from the List of bus routes in Edmonton alone show various third party references including 1, 2, 3, 4.. and that just shows examples from one news source and that are currently in the article. A search through other newspapers and other sources show other articles, confirming notability of said routes. A look at WP:NOTGUIDE shows no application to this context. To quote from the policy, "Not the telephone number or street address of the "best" restaurants, nor the current price of a café au lait on the Champs-Élysées."... neither this nor any other excerpt from that policy seemingly has any application here. - Vanstrat ((🗼)) 03:08, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Edmonton removed. Störm   (talk)  03:38, 7 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep and SNOW close. We should not be doing mass-AFDs like this for systems that only share a vehicle type (and barely at that), but no other commonalities. The Vancouver list, for example, has hundreds of references and could be cleaned up to a respectable standard as a standalone list.  Sounder Bruce  03:21, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Vancouver list is no more on AfD. Störm   (talk)  03:29, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Although List of bus routes in Metro Vancouver is referenced only by a list of bus timetables, all obtained from the same website. Ajf773 (talk) 04:12, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * — Note: An editor has expressed a concern that SounderBruce (talk • contribs) has been canvassed to this discussion. 192.160.216.52 (talk) 13:36, 7 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep – some of these lists are poor, some just have a list without additional information. However, this is not a rationale for deletion, and it does not mean the lists are inherently unencyclopedic. There are many notable bus routes around the world as pointed out above, with in-depth coverage in the media and literature. There are current and historical ridership figures which are encyclopedic, even if they might not appear in (most of) these articles. The evolution of routes over time could also be interesting and fitting for Wikipedia, although I don't think any of these lists currently include such information. In any case, the rationale for deletion doesn't stand. Bus routes don't actually change very often compared to, say, sports statistics, and the rate of change isn't a reason to delete either one. Not sure about having articles on 'route' or 'station' – what does that mean? —Ynhockey (Talk) 07:21, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep – Lahore is one of the oldest cities in the world, and its routes are notable.— Trip Wire ________ʞlɐʇ 07:29, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * How are they notable? Ajf773 (talk) 07:55, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * The city is Notable, by extension, so are the routes.— Trip Wire ________ʞlɐʇ 08:43, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Notability is NOT inherited. Your comment is an arbitrary statement that isn't even backed up by any reasoning. Ajf773 (talk) 09:00, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I seriously doubt the bus routes are notable based solely on being n a notable city, but they are much more likely to be notable if the city is well known and notable. Prince of Thieves (talk) 09:12, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Except, there is nothing to establish that, especially with the sources provided. Ajf773 (talk) 09:14, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * In theory however, the bus routes in Hong Kong are more likely to be covered by a secondary source that the bus routes in Nowhere Else, South Australia. Prince of Thieves (talk) 09:24, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Notability is not inherited, sure, but it sure is connected with the notability of the subject (the city of Lahore in this case). The transportation system of Lahore is notable enough and itself has an article.— Trip Wire ________ʞlɐʇ 09:39, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Strong keep per above arguments - this AfD is a mess. I would recommend merging the Sri Lankan ones however there isnt enough general sources to keep it going. I would recommend renomination of these, and these only. The only one I would delete would be Huizhou. The rest IMO can be kept. SNOW keeping isn't an option owing to !delete votes. Nightfury 08:54, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * — Note: An editor has expressed a concern that Nightfury (talk • contribs) has been canvassed to this discussion. 192.160.216.52 (talk) 13:34, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * A ping isnt canvassing. Night<b style="color: White">fury</b> 13:37, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * A ping is canvassing if the set of editors pinged was selected by a biased method. The list of editors pinged here came from a set of five previous AfDs, two of which were chosen by the nom to make a biased point and three of which were chosen by me to make another biased point.  Then a third editor decided to use those five AfDs, chosen for entirely unrelated reasons, to provide a list of editors to ping.  I am concerned that that's canvassing, and that's what that template is for.  Of course the closing admin is free to ignore it, and I fully expect that they will, but I still feel that it's important to express my concern.  The Wiki works better if everyone shares their honest opinions! 192.160.216.52 (talk) 13:43, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I suggest you read WP:CANVASSING. <b style="color: White;">Night</b><b style="color: White">fury</b> 13:50, 7 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete. Now that everyone has been pinged. We are not a directory of bus routes, or anything else. Some editors have asserted that some lists are inherently notable and others are not, without making any policy based case. It cannot be snow keep when a number of editors have made policy based case for deletion. WP:OR, WP:NOTTRAVEL, WP:NOTGUIDE, WP:NOTDIR and WP:FANCRUFT all have a relevance here and as most routes are commercial opperations there is a risk of using Wikipedia for advertising and promotion.Charles (talk) 10:21, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * — Note: An editor has expressed a concern that Charlesdrakew (talk • contribs) has been canvassed to this discussion. 192.160.216.52 (talk) 13:47, 7 March 2018 (UTC)


 * There is of course the option of moving them all to Wikivoyage, which is a travel guide, and using redirects. Prince of Thieves (talk) 10:31, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment Wikivoyage didn't want lists of airline destinations, which users claim violated WP:NOTGUIDE; I would argue something similar here, people who want to maintain a travel guide have no interest in a list of all bus routes in a city, but rather an interest in telling you which bus routes take you to which tourist destinations. SportingFlyer  talk  04:07, 8 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Procedural close - per IAR if for no other reason. Bundling a large group of articles connected only by general topic area is a recipe for "no consensus". Even if there was indication that the community was leaning toward "lists of bus routes" being a non notable subject (which there isn't),  bundling together lists from separate continents cannot possibly lead to a consensus. John from Idegon (talk) 10:47, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I believe the intention is to gain a "all lists of bus routes should be deleted per WP:NOTDIR" type consensus. Which as a rationale applies equally to all lists of bus routes regardless of where they are or how well sourced they are. Prince of Thieves (talk) 10:59, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * And clearly that is a meta issue which is not what AfD is for. A discussion should be held to clarify the notability guideline. Thanks, . John from Idegon (talk) 11:11, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree with you, maybe this would be better suited for an RfC on WP:VP/P. Prince of Thieves (talk)


 * Delete. Bus route articles are not encyclopedic. They are also difficult to maintain and the time could be better spent on educational articles. Wikipedia is not a travel guide and there appears to be nothing historic about this bus route.desmay (talk) 16:12, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Have you even bothered to read the articles? These are a list of bus routes, not individual articles about bus routes in detail. Class 455 ( talk |stand clear of the doors!)  17:09, 7 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment In my opinion above listed articles (I've striked some) should be deleted per WP:NOTGUIDE, WP:NOTDIRECTORY. Also, closing admin should see the fanish comments of 'strong keep', 'speedy keep', 'procedural close' and other like 'very useful for traveling purposes' and many others. There are very few above keep comments that cite policy. Thanks. Störm   (talk)  18:06, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Some of them should be nominated again singularly if that is the case (the Sri Lanka ones in one bunch). Most others need to be culled down to remove the obvious travel guide content. Ajf773 (talk) 19:02, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I just read through all the keep votes again and many of the comments aren't "fan-ish" but rather are because there are a lot of users pointing out the myriad problems with this current AfD. WP:NOTGUIDE doesn't apply here for the reasons I've described above - this isn't information you would find in a travel guide - this is something you might find in a book on bus transportation in a given city (like the cite in the Hong Kong list), which doesn't tell people how they should travel around an unfamiliar place, but rather describes how transportation has developed in that specific city. You've struck a few votes but you claim the rest should be deleted per WP:NOTGUIDE, WP:NOTDIRECTORY - why are the ones you struck any different, if those are the criteria you don't think they meet? If anything, you should withdraw your nomination, figure out if any of these articles don't pass WP:GNG, and renominate on those grounds. In that case, you might get the Sri Lanka ones deleted. SportingFlyer  talk  04:06, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
 * In my opinion, if the article replicates content that can be found on a transit authorities official website, then it's a travel guide. If the article goes above and beyond that, by inclusion of secondary sources demonstrating the importance of that in a city, then it's encyclopedic. However I don't feel List of bus routes in .... articles accomplish that. Better examples are Bus transport in Singapore or Buses in Malta where such content can be described in detail. Individually, bus routes, are almost always non-notable. List of bus routes in London is a notable exception to that. Ajf773 (talk) 04:16, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Not that it matters, but I disagree with you on the interpretation of WP:NOTTRAVEL, though I think you're absolutely right on notability grounds. As noted above, most routes are non-notable, but I think the routes as a list can be. I think WP:NOTTRAVEL gets used too much on transportation AfD's since it's related to travel instead of excluding what it's really meant to exclude, so forgive my frustration. SportingFlyer  talk  04:40, 8 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. Bus routes are not subject to the sort of change that WP cannot handle. For each of the places mentioned we probably have at lease 2 or 3 WPedians who can keep track of the situation. That's   more than we have for  most all BLPs, and BLPs are much more sensitive articles where keeping up with changes is much more important.
 * Bus routes do not change form from day to day like exchange rates, or year to year the way the student numbers of  education organizations do, and usually not  even every 2 or 4 years in the manner of election statistics. (Of course, I am judging by what I know, which is the US, and particularly NYC.  Each of the 7 bus routes nearest my house has changed at most twice in the last 35 years (except temporary changes for construction and the like. Looking at maps of other cities I know over a long period, it's similar.  It may be completely different in some of the other places here, but each place would each have to be considered separately.
 * It's reasonable that they change so rarely. They're important to urban infrastructure. They define neighborhoods, they affect residence and employment patterns. They concern local politicians and local communities. There is often a considerable political effort needed to change them.  DGG ( talk ) 02:03, 8 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep per WP:TRAINWRECK. At least some of the bus routes pass WP:N, so they should not be systemically deleted. Re-nominate if you want to. feminist (talk) 08:21, 8 March 2018 (UTC)


 * KEEP as per Prince of Thieves above, and as per WP:PRESERVE. This is an attempted policy change, and should not be done via a deletion discussion. This sort of mass nomination is rarely a good idea, as significant differences in notability cannot be examined in the needed detail. A list may be more notable than any individual item on it, and the guidance that individual bus routes are rarely notable does not automatically apply to lists of routes. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 23:17, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete all per IINFO and NOTTRAVEL. In the alternative, procedural close and move discussion to an RfC. James (talk/contribs) 20:24, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.