Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sonasan railway station


 * 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 under G7. Deletion requested by author that created article to prove a WP:POINT. Deletion is without prejudice to an article being created that demonstrates WP:GNG is met by WP:V from WP:RSs. Mjroots (talk) 12:03, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Sonasan railway station

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This railway station is not notable. The article fails WP:GNG. The article should be redirected to its line according to Notability_(Railway_lines_and_stations). Because that article does not exist, it should be REDIRECTED to Western Railway. Rhadow (talk) 20:51, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Indian-railway related AFDs:
 * Articles for deletion/Sonasan railway station
 * Articles for deletion/Hapa Road railway station — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tyw7 (talk • contribs) 23:45, 2 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. IntoThinAir (talk) 21:36, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. IntoThinAir (talk) 21:36, 2 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep - for the exact same reasons in the other mainline rail station AfD started by the same nom. WP consensus wisely decided long ago that all rail stations are notable.  This ensures thousands of editors don't waste there time and energy fleshing out and debating the retention of articles on the tens of thousands of stations when editors efforts are much better spent on creating new articles and improving existing ones.  For this and most stations, it's impossible for in depth coverage like extensive government reports and budgets to not exist.Oakshade (talk) 23:09, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
 * "[I]t's impossible for in depth coverage like extensive government reports and budgets to not exist." This argument is based on faith, rather than demonstrable evidence. It is a self-sealing argument, a logical fallacy. Rhadow (talk) 23:33, 2 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete or Merge as per OP and for the reasons I argue at Articles for deletion/Hapa Road railway station. --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 23:43, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete The article is a stub which does not establish the notability of this station.TH1980 (talk) 02:24, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment-, I am bit confused. It appears that you created this article and after 7 minutes nominated it for deletion. You could have simply G7ed it. What's going on? Hitro talk 07:40, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
 * , wait he created the article? I didn't realize it. That makes this comment on my talk page so much clearer. It's a WP:POINT creation.
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Tyw7&oldid=881503564#Notability. I've G7ed it. --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 11:01, 3 February 2019 (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.