Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Transdominion Express


 * 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 Transportation in Virginia. Consensus is this dead project does not meet the requirements for article-level coverage. Consensus is to merge the main article and to delete the station stubs and other associated pages.  Sandstein  07:24, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Transdominion Express

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Formerly proposed rail system that never even got a bill approved in the state legislature. All of the relevant content can be satisfied with a sentence or two added to Northeast Regional, which is where the planning energy went instead.

Additionally, there are several articles on proposed stations for the system. While former, existing, or definitely-planned stations are pretty much always notable, these are stations that never existed other that as a dot on a map. (There were likely former stations in these towns which would be worthy of an article, but without any historical information currently in the articles, it would be just as easy to create them from scratch in the future). I have not nominated several articles which are past or planned Amtrak stations and thus have more information available.
 * Former Amtrak station, article expanded with that history
 * Former Amtrak station, article expanded with that history
 * Former Amtrak station, article expanded with that history

There are also seven templates and two categories that are wholly dependent on this article existing, and are clearly not needed without it. I can file a separate TfD and CfD if necessary, but it seems that these 9 are linked to this article's fate:
 * Template:S-line/TDX left/Richmond-Bristol
 * Template:S-line/TDX right/Richmond-Bristol
 * Template:S-line/TDX left/Washington-Bristol
 * Template:S-line/TDX right/Washington-Bristol
 * Template:TDX color
 * Template:TDX lines
 * Template:TDX stations
 * Category:Transdominion Express
 * Category:Transdominion Express stations

Pi.1415926535 (talk) 23:04, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Merge into Transportation in Virginia. The proposal is long dead and there's not much to say about it. Mackensen (talk) 23:36, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:23, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:25, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Agree, the TDX project died in 2013 or 2014 it looks like. Consider remaking if there is talks that surface again in the future. Quidster4040 (talk) 17:02, 13 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Merge the main article per, and delete the station articles and templates. Do Bedford station (Virginia) and Farmville station have other notability?--Cúchullain t/ c 19:20, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Bedford, Farmville, and Christiansburg (which I just struck from the nomination) were stops on the Mountaineer and Hilltopper. That made basic information about them extremely easy to find compared to station locations that never had Amtrak service. I've updated those articles with historic photos and cited information. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:56, 14 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Redirect in that case, as there's certainly nothing to suggests its own actually convincing article, and all of this, is simply best relinked to the other article; nothing else convincing at all. SwisterTwister   talk  04:37, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep It was covered in reliable sources at the time, and if it was notable then, it's notable now. Smartyllama (talk) 15:23, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
 * A lot of rail project proposals get a lot of press and go exactly nowhere. They're not inherently notable or significant on their own. This one never got approved by an political body, never moved beyond the study stage at a planning agency, and never even got much press. That's telling from the current state of the article - most of the current text is information about the Northeast Regional service that happened instead of this project, plus a list of existing transportation services only tangentially related to the article. Compare to, for example, Pike Transit Initiative, which has much more well-cited information about the history of the project (that is not best located as background in another article). Pi.1415926535 (talk) 15:36, 22 July 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.