Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seattle Street Railway


 * 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. Kurykh (talk) 20:55, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Seattle Street Railway

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Completely duplicates information contained in other articles. Anmccaff (talk) 18:02, 16 February 2017 (UTC)


 * ''NOTE: The article was moved during this AFD to Seattle Municipal Street Railway. -- do ncr  am  22:52, 23 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep with expansion. The subject matter is notable and would be able to be covered with non-redundant information with a bit of research (which I was planning to do anyway).  Sounder Bruce  18:07, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
 * The only thing this would describe as a proper name was a horsecar line, rapidly absorbed by the thing that became Seattle municipal. 3 cars, 10 men, 20 horses.  Only notable as a stand-alone had it been a first, or an only.  Anmccaff (talk) 18:39, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
 * If title is wrong, it can be changed, but the article is about the entire streetcar network operated between 1884 and 1941, not only about the first horsecar line opened.--L9A8M (talk) 18:59, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
 * We already have an article about that.Anmccaff (talk) 19:04, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
 * And what is? I have not found it, otherwise I would not create this article--L9A8M (talk) 19:09, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm not seeing an article for Seattle Municipal Street Railway [was a redlink, but "Seattle Street Railway" has been moved to there-- do ncr  am  22:52, 23 February 2017 (UTC)] (which is what the municipal system was officially named). There's a coverage gap for pre-Metro transit history in Seattle, and this is one huge part of it.  Sounder  Bruce  19:34, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
 * There isn't one now, but there are Stone and Webster, Seattle, Puget Power King County Metro, Transportation in Seattle...all of which contain, or should contain, this subject. Anmccaff (talk) 20:00, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
 * They should contain mentions of the streetcar system, but they should not go into detail. An independent article would be able to have a more detailed history of the system, its routes, its influence on Seattle's growth and land use, and its decline and replacement (and long-standing effects and remnants).  Sounder Bruce  21:25, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

I think while the article is in its infancy (or, for its current state, the abortus stage) keeping it in one of the obvious choices above and creating an article once it was big enough, and accurate enough, to demand one, would be much more sensible than flailing away at a misbegotten stub. Anmccaff (talk) 22:55, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Outright deletion is a bit much, but I can see moving this back to draftspace and having multiple editors collaborate and expand it there to be a good option.  Sounder Bruce  23:59, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
 * That could work well also, yes. Anmccaff (talk) 01:21, 17 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:31, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:31, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep This article should be allowed to grow. Why did the nominator only give it a couple of hours of life? Secondarywaltz (talk) 18:56, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Because, as you can see above, it was created in error. Anmccaff (talk) 19:04, 16 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep It sounds like this can be expanded, but it should be expanded to show notability if it can be expanded. South Nashua (talk) 20:19, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep, I guess. I think the article was developed during this AFD and that early criticisms above may no longer apply so much. It was moved from Seattle Street Railway to Seattle Municipal Street Railway during this AFD. -- do  ncr  am  22:52, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep - The focus and content of the article has changed since it was nominated, and in it's current form it's notable. There is even an academic article about it (it's an old article, but scholarly and in a respected journal nonetheless). Fyddlestix (talk) 19:07, 24 February 2017 (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.