Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New Barauni Junction


 * 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. Doczilla @SUPERHEROLOGIST 00:43, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

New Barauni Junction

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Article does not meet WP:GEOFEAT as a transportation facility, no reliable sources added and no significant coverage in a google search.  Comr Melody Idoghor  (talk)  22:26, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and India.  Comr Melody Idoghor   (talk)  22:26, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep There is a source, and it's highly likely there are local non-English sources. I think it's beneficial to Wikipedia to keep all station articles as this helps users navigate using the adjacent stations feature and wth the Nearby feature on mobile. NemesisAT (talk) 07:24, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
 * That argument makes no sense. It would be just as easy—arguably easier—for the (unlikely) hypothetical user using Wikipedia to navigate the railway system, were this to be a redirect to the article on the relevant rail line. &#8209; Iridescent 19:58, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
 * This article doesn't even use the adjacent stations template. Did you read it? Trainsandotherthings (talk) 20:33, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment Even if this is kept, it needs to be totally rewritten. In its current state it should be at a minimum draftified until it follows the basics of Wikipedia style and formatting. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 13:03, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. There is longstanding consensus that all railway stations are notable. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:46, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * That doesn't automatically mean that each gets a stand-alone page, though. There's an equally long-standing consensus that if the sources don't exist for a stand-alone article, it gets converted into a redirect to the relevant List of stations in… page. &#8209; Iridescent 13:59, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Not actually true, as WP:RAILOUTCOMES points out. It is extremely rare for railway station AfDs to result in redirection. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:12, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep For what is worth I do not agree with either of the previous keep comments. For me it comes back to WP:GNG.  Since the article was nominated for deletion references have been added to articles in Hindustan (newspaper) and Dainik Jagran.  From a google translate each article is just about the station so meets the significant coverage requirement.  I know very little about the Indian Newspaper market but from their brief articles each newspaper appears to be an independent source and there don't seem to be any red flags that they are not reliable sources.  A search of WP:RSN doesn't yield anything either.  Therefore I think that the article meets our notability requirements and should be kept.  RicDod (talk) 19:34, 22 June 2022 (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.