Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The West Coaster (Victorian train)


 * 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 merge to List of named trains in Victoria. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:55, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

The West Coaster (Victorian train)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No WP:SIGCOV apparently available under the current title or the alternative spelling "Westcoaster". Unusally for a named train, there is no reference to it in Trove newspapers or more recent news archives. The mentions in offline sources I have are in passing only, such as lists of named trains - no indication of independent notability. The unsourced statement in the article that it appeared on modern-era V/Line timetables is accurate - 2006 for example - but again, there is no indication that this confers notability. Triptothecottage (talk) 01:06, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Triptothecottage (talk) 01:06, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Triptothecottage (talk) 01:06, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Triptothecottage (talk) 01:06, 17 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Merge to Victorian Railways or Port Fairy railway line (the train company that ran the service, or the line that it ran on - the second one probably makes more sense, but either are fine) List of named trains in Victoria (as per WP:ATD) Bookscale (talk) 10:33, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
 * FYI, it is mentioned in this article, out of interest (where it is spelled in one word "Westcoaster"). You're probably better off looking at a book on Victorian railway history which will probably deal with the subject and show how notable it actually is. Bookscale (talk) 10:46, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, I found that picture caption – and that's all it is. And I should have been clearer that the offline sources I inspected were Victorian railway histories, but I freely admit I don't have much to hand and there may be something I've missed. I do wonder if the name was something of an attempt to emulate the popularity of The Gippslander, which is far more well-reported despite being a very similar service. Triptothecottage (talk) 10:57, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks User:Triptothecottage - I agree with your point. The Wiki article presently has no sources so merging to the relevant organisation or line will enable an article to be recreated if sources are found in future. No reason to keep at the moment. Bookscale (talk) 11:01, 17 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Merge per above. The current content doesn't justify a stand-alone article. Mackensen (talk) 12:03, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Merge -- I was inclined to say delete. We had this issue some time ago over named trains in India, where they all have names.  If merged the merge target should be a list of named trains within the target article.  Peterkingiron (talk) 13:28, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment: The remaining named trains in Victoria either have their own article (and lots of sources) or are merged into a larger article about the line or train type. Bookscale (talk) 00:41, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment and ping : there's now List of named trains in Victoria, which is probably a better/alternative merge target. Triptothecottage (talk) 01:49, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks Triptothecottage - happy for a merge to that page (agree it makes more sense than my suggestions). Bookscale (talk) 11:37, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
 * That'll do nicely--though it seems more a summary article than a list, so Named trains in Victoria might be a more appropriate title. Mackensen (talk) 12:08, 23 July 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.