Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Railfan


 * 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   Speedy close as pointy nom. NAC. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 20:52, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Railfan

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Pointless article which I imagine is read by no-one and is a waste of Wikipedia server space Dingdong12 (talk) 20:25, 17 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep: I'm not sure this is a valid reason for delete but 200+ hits./day is more than some science articles. If it has sources, and even if obscure but encyclopedic it should stay.If this comes up on a goog search it will probably be useful to reader. I've never neard this term, but I have heard about trainspotting, but failing notability wasn't suggested as an issue. Nerdseeksblonde (talk) 20:28, 17 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.  -- tedder (talk) 20:39, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep: seems to be a WP:POINTy AFD, article is well-sourced to meet WP:GNG. tedder (talk) 20:40, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep and close: Based on this editor's contributions, this seems to be quite pointy. Dayewalker (talk) 20:44, 17 October 2009 (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.