Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shropshire Bus Route 435


 * 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 delete.  Sandstein  21:54, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Shropshire Bus Route 435

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

PROD declined on the basis that there has been a road traffic accident on the route. Notability is not inherited from a collision that is itself not notable for Wikipedia. A standard local bus route which fails WP:GNG, WP:NOTTRAVEL. Products and services are supposed to be covered in the article of the provider per WP:PRODUCT. Charles (talk) 15:31, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Class455fan1 (talk) 17:03, 27 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete. I would normally want to keep these kind of articles, however this one contains very little content and has no references whatsoever. Therefore it fails WP:GNG.It also qualifies for a Speedy Deletion under Section A7. Class455fan1 (talk) 17:00, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete This is the only piece of media coverage I can find, but that doesn't make it sufficiently notable.  Rcsprinter123    (notify)  19:53, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Redirect. The PROD was actually declined primarily on the basis that this is a plausible redirect to Minsterley Motors, which of course it is. Deletion would accordingly violate ATD. The Minsterly Motors article does contain material about the route. A7 does not apply to bus routes, because a bus route is a line on a map, a geographical place. NOTINHERITED, which is not even a guideline, does not apply to the 435 bus collision with a lorry, as that would be like saying that something can't inherit notability from its own history. In fact there is no inheritance alleged at all, as the collision is not a separate topic, it is an integral part of this topic. The argument advanced amounts to "a topic cannot inherit notability from itself" and that is gibberish nonsense. James500 (talk) 22:04, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  Nordic   Dragon  10:12, 29 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Nordic   Dragon  10:13, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete per Charles & Nordic - Fails both NOTTRAVEL and GNG, IMHO it's better off on Wikia or whatever. – Davey 2010 Talk 21:45, 5 March 2016 (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.