Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mount Murray railway station, New South Wales


 * 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The result was   Withdrawn. Reliable sources has been added. Schuy m 1 ( talk ) 00:56, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Mount Murray railway station, New South Wales

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

I can't find any reliable sources that show notability. Schuy m 1 ( talk ) 14:32, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:09, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:10, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. The article doesn't require references. All railway stations are inherently notable. That having been said, print-only references such as local newspapers probably exist. -- Eastmain (talk) 21:06, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Where does it say that it is inherently notable? Local news does not show notability, or else there would be an article on mostly everything. Schuy m 1  ( talk ) 21:08, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * It's often said at AfD, but I don't believe railway stations are inherantly notable, not according to WP:OUTCOMES or WP:STATION anyway. All articles require references, but at the very least this should be redirected to Unanderra-Moss Vale railway line, New South Wales as a valid search term, not deleted. PC78 (talk) 22:25, 26 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep - the overall article Unanderra-Moss Vale railway line, New South Wales does or will link to all the stations on the line, including this one.   Tabletop (talk) 22:27, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * The article needs to be notable. Schuy m 1  ( talk ) 22:37, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep We can't dispute the existence of a railway station. Michellecrisp (talk) 23:21, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * It's not about existence. It's about WP:NOTABILITY. Schuy m 1  ( talk ) 23:24, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * In response to above, the article now has more references establishing its notability. Its buildings are heritage listed, it played an important role when it was an active station. Michellecrisp (talk) 00:49, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment - precedent over any such ideas has been established extensively throughout the Australian project prior to this - this afd is effectively out of order in relation to previous discussions in numerous places, if necessary some longer term editors could provide the points where this issue has been hammered out before SatuSuro 00:27, 27 October 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.