Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/South Devon Sea Wall Rail Incidents


 * 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. Cbrown1023 01:56, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

South Devon Sea Wall Rail Incidents

 * - (View AfD) (View log)

Orphaned, unreferenced article dealing with a topic that seems very unencyclopedic - Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, nor is it a railway incident log! -- ChrisO 18:22, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, severely unnotable (and by appearances, original research). --Dhartung | Talk 19:13, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. These incidents could have become disasters with many deaths. I think they are encyclopedic. --Eastmain 19:33, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, on account that they are not really disasters, they're little more than incidents. For what it's worth, Eastmain, "could have become disasters" is nowhere near equivalent to "actually did become disasters" - by that rationale, many near-impacts on the highways should be getting documented here on WP. --Dennisthe2 19:55, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak keep and cleanup - Seems notable enough, long enough to be an article. Just missing a few refernces. AstroHurricane001(Talk+Contribs+Ubx) 00:46, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Why is it notable? -- ChrisO 01:34, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Never mind, it's not notable unless if there were many casulties and $$ lost. AstroHurricane001(Talk+Contribs+Ubx) 13:40, 18 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete, not particularly notable as rail incidents go. Choess 09:31, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Acts of nature that only affect a tiny area or don't cause casualties are not encyclopedic.  If there is anything worth keeping merge it into the article for the line. Vegaswikian 06:45, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete non-notable. There are many incidents of this kind, we can't possibly list all of them.  Signature brendel  04:00, 23 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. Fails WP:Notability on the basis that there was no significant monetary cost and not even any injuries. Looks like a list of major rail delays? If we did that for every line in Britain we could fill the WP servers to capacity fairly quickly... Also fails WP:Verifiability through lack of sources. --DeLarge 16:37, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. A couple power outages? Track maintenance? This is laughable. --Sable232 21:56, 24 January 2007 (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.