Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steam into History


 * 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   no consensus. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:16, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Steam into History

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not notable. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH, GHits limited to promotional sites, social media, and the one local paper. GNews limited to the local paper, no widespread coverage from multiple sources. Previously speedily deleted as promotional. GregJackP  Boomer!   05:46, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:24, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:24, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:24, 24 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Objection to proposed deletion of Steam into History page. It has been updated to include organization details, citations and references. The company exists, is in full operation, and has moderate media coverage. User talk:fjd1990 09:43, 26 August 2013
 * The fact that the company exists and is operating is not sufficient for inclusion in Wikipedia. It has to be notable, which unfortunately it is not.  You have references, but the only ones that discuss the subject of the article are local, and you need more to meet the notability requirements.  For example, you cite the NY Times, but is from 1863 on the historic railroad and has nothing to do with the current enterprise.   GregJackP   Boomer!   14:04, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Thus far media coverage has been quite extensive in Pennsylvania news outlets. Due to the local nature of the organization, combined with its fairly recent inauguration, it has not garnered "national" coverage, but that should not diminish the notability of the county and state news outlets which have documented said organization. User talk:fjd1990 18:40, 26 August 2013
 * Uh, you may want to re-read WP:CORPDEPTH - you just listed three items that the policy expressly states are not suitable for establishing notability. The policy also states "On the other hand, attention solely from local media, or media of limited interest and circulation, is not an indication of notability; at least one regional, national, or international source is necessary."  You just admitted that there is not such coverage at this time.   GregJackP   Boomer!   01:35, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

I admitted to there not being national coverage, however I have claimed that there is extensive regional coverage. The definition of what is considered regional can easily be debated, especially in this situation where cited media outlets are circulated on a state-wide level. User talk:fjd1990 14:30, 27 August 2013

Again I protest. The format of this wikipedia page is based on numerous other tourist railroad operations. It is intended to be informative, not promotional. Please see Strasburg Rail Road, Conway Scenic Railroad, and Essex Steam Train, three wiki pages which I have used as guidance for the formatting of Steam Into History. If one believes that by simply describing an operation is advertising, then almost every enterprise with a wikipedia page is merely promotional and should be erased. User talk:fjd1990 11:30, 29 August 2013.
 * Delete - Clearly just used for advertising. aycliffe  talk 07:07, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, when you look to delete an article, you have to check for possible sources prior to nominating the article. A check of Google for Strasburg shows references in published books, as does Conway.  Essex has coverage from the NY Times and Newsday, in addition to at least one Florida paper.  All of that goes to notability, while a similar check of Steam into History does not show significant coverage.   GregJackP   Boomer!   23:14, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Again, a "regional" source is considered to be of a notable nature. I have argued that based on the ambiguous definition of the word "regional", you can certainly consider my sources to be regional based on their state-wide circulation. As for the other railroads (which I only used as an example to disprove the accusation of trying to advertise for Steam Into History by showing the typical wiki formatting of a tourist railroad company) Essex and Conway may have notable sources for coverage, however they are not used for citations on their wikipedia page and yet both companies have been included here. User talk:fjd1990 10:15, 30 August 2013 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:40, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

 *Keep  Passes WP:GNG. Thorough documentation of railroad in various, credited media outlets. If the article appears to have a promotional tone, it is not intentional. Wiki users are free and welcome to make revisions where they deem so necessary, but the page should remain. User talk:fjd1990 15:20, 5 September 2013. You're only allowed to !vote once, and you did so above with "Objection to proposed deletion..." -- &#124;  Uncle Milty  &#124;  talk  &#124;  02:14, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep as passing WP:GNG based on extensive news coverage in Pennsylvania sources plus coverage in The Baltimore Sun. Article does still have something of a promotional tone, and that problem should be addressed. --Arxiloxos (talk) 05:15, 2 September 2013 (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.