Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of trains run by Indian Railways


 * 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   no consensus.  Sandstein  17:43, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

List of trains run by Indian Railways

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Indiscriminate list of information leading to dozens of external internet sites and few wikipedia sites Jax 0677 (talk) 01:41, 24 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep The list is not indiscriminate as its scope seems quite clear. Wikipedia contains numerous articles about individual train services in India &mdash; see Named passenger trains of India, for example.  The list just seems to need work to replace external links with wikilinks.  That is a matter of ordinary editing, not deletion per our editing policy. Warden (talk) 09:18, 24 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete  This looks like the worst sort of WP:NOTDIR.  An article with no content, other than an unintelligible list of external links to trains of no demonstrable notability.  There's scope here for an article akin to Named passenger trains of India, but this current article bears no relation to that. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:34, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
 * It's a list not an article and so it's no surprise that it has this structure. For examples of comparable lists for other geographies, see List of Canadian railways or  List of common carrier freight railroads in the United States.  Warden (talk) 10:28, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
 * What do you mean by "comparable"? In defined scope (agreed) or in content (completely different)?
 * This category for named passenger trains of India is remarkably large. Sadly most of the articles within are falling rather short, but that's fixable (one would hope). However this current list article isn't even linking to the wiki articles we already have (and seeing the size of the cat, the crossover is presumed to be large), it just links to ELs. There is no content within the list, it doesn't link to further wiki content via its links. One column is entirely meaningless, as it's merely an Indian Railways magic code number. The whole article appears to be more of a vast spam linkfarm for ixigo than it does an encyclopedia article. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:56, 24 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete: WP:NOT. The linkfarm argument also appears to have merit.&mdash;Kww(talk) 11:14, 24 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Update To address the linkfarm issue, I have reworked the list to be a list of wikilinks. Merger with with similar List of named passenger trains of India is now indicated.  By bringing these together, we will get a comprehensive index of notable Indian railroad services. Warden (talk) 12:25, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Still delete (or at least, convert to a category). This is the sort of content that belongs as a category, not a list article. There's nothing here except the list of article names - that's better handled as a category. Using articles rather than ELs is certainly an improvement, but there's still nothing in addition to those articles. A category would achieve just as much and would be better maintained in the future. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:35, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Our guideline WP:CLN explains that lists and categories are complementary and so "the "category camp" should not delete or dismantle Wikipedia's lists". Warden (talk) 13:35, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Some things work better as categories. This content-free list is just one of those. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:00, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
 * No, in this case a list is best because there are missing articles and links and a list will support redlinks such as the Flying Rani Express better.
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 18:18, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 18:19, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 18:20, 24 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep – The article's formatting has been significantly changed compared to the time that it was nominated for removal from Wikipedia (diff page of last edit prior to nomination for deletion). As it is now, the article is a focused, discriminate list full of blue links to other Wikipedia articles. Also, per WP:NOTDUP, "It is neither improper nor uncommon to simultaneously have a category, a list, and a navigation template which all cover the same topic. These redundant systems of organizing information are considered to be complementary, not inappropriately duplicative." Lastly, the article appears to not have any of the points listed at WP:NOTDIR at this time within its style. Northamerica1000(talk) 22:51, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete and recreate as a proper disambiguation page when sub articles are created. It does a great disservice to our readers to list over 14,000 entries in one single list-article -- which is what this list will turn out to be if completed (and that's including only regular passenger trains and not including the commuter trains or vacation specials). If we don't list the entire 14K+ on this page, then the article ought to be renamed to something like "selective list of trains run by the IR" or some such. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  14:30, 30 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Merge with List of named passenger trains of India Abhishikt (talk) 21:29, 1 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, The Bushranger One ping only 20:47, 1 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete There's no reason to have this large list as an article when a category could serve much the same purpose. Ducknish (talk) 22:39, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I have made a category and placed all of the trains currently contained within the list in it. Ducknish (talk) 23:23, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Categorize. The article appears to be a large list of nothing but Wikilinks. This is a perfect candidate for a category. -- NINTENDUDE 64 01:18, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * See my comment above Ducknish (talk) 01:37, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thumbs up :-) -- NINTENDUDE 64 01:47, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep: though the list is a faction of the actual number of trains, I think moving on it will need to be broken up into list of shatabdis, list of rajdhanis etc or even by railway zones. I suggest a template formatting with further info and an expanded rather than just a list of names though. Around The Globe  सत्यमेव जयते 07:56, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep It is indiscriminate. It list Wikipedia articles for things that have something significant in common.  A perfectly valid list article.   D r e a m Focus  19:33, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete: serves a purpose that would be better handled by a (now-created) category. The list is currently provides no information not included in a category page and is almost entirely unsourced, with the verifiability issue being better handled via the individual articles and their inclusion in the category, rather than at second hand via this list. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 08:05, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment - See WP:NOTDUP. Also, articles can be expanded with text, while categories cannot. Northamerica1000(talk) 13:17, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Blunt rebuttal: as I stated above, "the list is currently provides no information not included in a category page", so WP:NOTDUP notwithstanding, the two are blatantly duplicative and not in the least bit "complementary". That lists and categories can be complementary, does not mean that they always are. Nor does it mean that we should always allow both, where one or other clearly obviates the need for the other. Nor has anybody demonstrated any likelihood that the list will go beyond mere duplication of the category. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 05:01, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Is there the slightest indication that this article will ever be "expanded with text" ? I can think of nothing to add to this list article that doesn't belong better on the individual train articles. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:24, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
 * It would be easy to expand the list into a table. For example, you might have columns for the terminii, e.g. the Chitrakoot Express runs from Jabalpur to Lucknow.  And you might have a picture of the locomotive.  And you might give the years of service.  And so on.  Warden (talk) 05:50, 9 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep a list and a category are both desirable--there are almost no cases where it would be otherwise. Since the individual trains are notable, than the list of them is justified. Whether this should be merged with the other list can be discussed subsequently. Given the very large number of Indian Wikipedians, many of whom in the Education program were last year having difficulty finding suitable topics to work on, this is very easily expandable.  DGG ( talk ) 03:45, 9 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.