Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Transportation on the Isle of Wight


 * 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 Keep.  BLACK KITE  00:57, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Transportation on the Isle of Wight

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Doesn't this pretty much make the article a how to guide? Pharmboy (talk) 18:37, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * What task is it giving you step-by-step instructions in performing? Uncle G (talk) 18:46, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment How to get there and how to get around once you are there. It may be worthwhile in WikiTravel or as a subsection in an article about the Island itself, but the entire article is how to get there by sea, rail, bus, etc.   Pharmboy (talk) 18:50, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * No it isn't. There are no step-by-step guides on how to get there in the entire article.  The article contains no recipes, tutorials, manuals, walk-throughs, or other how-to information.  Uncle G (talk) 18:58, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * WP:NOT doesn't use the phrase "step by step" so I guess it is a matter of interpretation, as the purpose of the article is 'how to get to and around' the place. A less confrontational tone would also be appreciated.   Pharmboy (talk) 19:10, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * No, the purpose of the article is not "how to get around the place". It's an article about transportation on the Isle of Wight.  And the policy gives you the very same list of things that I've just stated, none of which, as I have said, are in the article.  This isn't a matter of interpretation.  This is a matter of this article being nothing like what the policy is addressing at all.  And asking a question and contradicting a statement is not confrontational.  It is discussion, which is what this discussion sub-page is for.  Uncle G (talk) 19:21, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment It appears you and I define lots of things differently.  So were you saying KEEP?  I didn't see a vote.  Pharmboy (talk) 19:25, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge with main Isle of Wight article as separate "Transportation" section. Mh29255 (talk) 18:47, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment That would be fine with me. Pharmboy (talk) 18:50, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * It's already a summary style breakout article of Isle of Wight. Uncle G (talk) 18:58, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Retain: this is a useful article which contains plenty of encyclopaedic information - and admittedly a bit of buscruft as well. I can see the case Pharmboy makes but I consider that the problem with the article is that it needs editing, not deleting. There is a very active community of Island Wikipedians so I suggest we give this brand-new article a little while to be edited and see how it settles in. Naturenet | Talk 19:26, 17 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Strong Retain It was the consensus of discussion at the Isle of Wight talk page that this material should be spun out into its own subsiduary article. And so it was. It is new, and has a few rough edges still, but a lot can be done to improve this, such as discussing the history of transport on the Island (the history of the railways and ship transport etc is substantial and interesting). We are developing a family of strong articles about the Isle of Wight, and the main Isle of Wight page should be a clear and succinct summary of Island information. Other aspects of interest such as the culture, history, towns, transport, residents etc are being developed in a suite of subsiduary daughter articles. Remember, Wikipedia is not paper.--Filll (talk) 22:05, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep and Cleanup - (Editor of Similar Intrest Article) These types of articles act as a starting point for research and are top Top Importance in country WikiProjects. Personally I would trim down the prose, but tastes differ. Exit2DOS2000   •T•C•  08:20, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Fairly good comprehensive article. Some more detail would probably be appropriate. DGG (talk) 08:46, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep This article needs to be improved, perhaps starting with some historical background on transportation on the island. -- Nick Penguin ( contribs ) 23:42, 23 December 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.