Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/London Underground statistics


 * 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 Redirect to London Underground infrastructure. Keeper  |   76  19:59, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

London Underground statistics

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Article is simply a list of statistics, which violates policy at WP:NOT. – Dream out loud (talk) 14:48, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * If anything, Merge this into London Underground London Underground infrastructure. Simply south (talk) 14:53, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep . I'm not the biggest fan of this article, but it was created as a compromise after drawn-out discussion over the page London Underground trivia. (See first, second, third, and fourth AFD nominations.) WP:NOT cautions against "long and sprawling lists of statistics", which this is clearly not. If this page grows, maybe it will need more context, as recommended in WP:NOT, but for now it's plainly understandable and useful to the average reader. It really needs to be referenced, but that's a whole nother story. I oppose a merge because this is more detail than necessary in an overview article on the Tube. Calliopejen1 (talk) 14:54, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 15:05, 24 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete It does not meet WP:NOT. It seems to come mainly from TfL's website and linked pages. I don't see why these facts cannot be incorporated into the relevant LU articles, for example on the size and range of the network, or the engineering aspects. Just listing it makes it a trivia section in article form. BlinkingBlimey (talk) 15:38, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Listing things do not make things trivia necessarily, mainly lists. Simply south (talk) 16:02, 24 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep - London Underground is already a big article, so merging another article into it doesn't seem sensible. The information is clearly presented and not at all confusing, which is the reasoning behind WP:NOT.  Above all, Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia - its here to help people to find information.  If someone wanted to know what (say) the highest Tube station was, they wouldn't want to trawl through every article on Underground stations to find it; listing these facts here makes the information far more easily accessible, and that's the purpose of an encyclopaedia.  In a nutshell, deleting this article would make Wikipedia harder to use and therefore worse, not better. Waggers (talk) 15:52, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Redirect to London Underground infrastructure - does the same job, but better! Waggers (talk) 22:46, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Suggestion - One promising avenue for the improvement of the article series is the creation of an article called London Underground infrastructure into which this article could be incorporated. I may be bold and do this soon. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:02, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep WP:NOT is to prevent articles with useless and long lists of statistics which would just confuse readers. This is not exactly confusing or useless and is something which would be useful for anyone researching this.  Another option is to merge it into the main LU article as suggested above.  Tbo 157   (talk)  16:39, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Redirect. I just merged this article to the newly-created London Underground infrastructure (which is also a helpful place to have too-detailed info on electrification etc that is inappropriate for the main article).  It fits in very well there and that article is a fine length.  No need for a separate stats article any more. Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:02, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Er - haven't you already "suggested" this above? I know Wikipedia is not a democracy but one vote/comment/suggestion per person is sufficient unless you're replying specifically to someone else. Waggers (talk) 22:46, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge. --Funper (talk) 18:19, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Some interesting statistics here that could do with an article of their own.--Conjoiner (talk) 18:59, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - I am not a big fan of statistic pages, but this one has useful information that would if included in the main page bloat that even further. The article needs expanding to more sources, rather than just relying on the TfL website. It passes the criteria set at NOT. Poeloq (talk) 20:14, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * PLEASE NOTE Sorry to shout but no one seems to have noticed my comment above. This content has found what I think is a happy home at a new article called London Underground infrastructure; please consider this before voting to keep it as a separate page. Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:06, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * This article may be expanded to contain statistics that are not related to the infrastructure. Poeloq (talk) 21:51, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Then I think those statistics should go in whatever subarticle they are related to rather than lumping together a bunch of unrelated numbers under the heading "statistics". Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:01, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Redirect – As nominator of this AfD, I think it should be redirected to London Underground infrastructure as that is a similar article, but written as an encyclopedia article, rather than as a list. – Dream out loud (talk) 21:24, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - The current article is not at all about statistics, not even in the descriptive sense (please refer to our article), but about simple facts of the numerical and trivial type.--Tikiwont (talk) 10:40, 1 February 2008 (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.