Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/West Midlands bus routes 1, 2 & 5


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 01:54, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

West Midlands bus routes 1, 2 & 5

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Another bus route article that offers nothing as to how WP:GNG is met. Nothing in the way of references are provided and none appear to available on searching. Nuttah (talk) 17:36, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - Not having references is not a reason for deletion. Jeni  ( talk ) 00:59, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Not having references is not the reason for deletion, although Verifiability does require them. The reason for deletion is failure to meet WP:GNG. Nuttah (talk) 19:47, 22 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete bus routes are not notable; and that is certainly a valid reason for deletion.— Chris! c / t 02:53, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - 1) Not having many, if none, references is not a reason for deletion. 2) Saying this isn't notable is like saying that Arriva Midlands or Choice Travel is not notable. It takes a idiot to want to delete it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dudleybus (talk • contribs)
 * Note that WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS isn't a good argument to make on a deletion debate.— Chris! c / t 18:59, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Look here Chrishomingtang, as Jeni said, and I reliterated, Not having many, if none, references is not a reason for deletion. The 351 (former) was one of the last services to have a Leyland Lynx operation AND one of the last few services to have a constant MCW Metrobus operation. Since then it went to Optare Solo vehicles and Volvo B6LEs until its withdrawal in 2010 due to the North Walsall Network Review. Service 1 was one of the last few services to be operated by Chase coaches until they sold out to Arriva Midlands. Service 2 was initially set up to compete closely with service 351 and actually took over most of Arriva Midlands service 351 tendered journeys. User:Dudleybus User talk:Dudleybus 08:22, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, the lack of sources alone is not a valid reason for deletion. But sources are used to establish notability. So, if sources can't be located, then it is likely that the subject isn't notable. All I said was that because bus routes aren't notable per WP:GNG, it should be deleted.— Chris! c / t 20:48, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:01, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:43, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:43, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm struggling to see why these particular routes have been grouped together. I usually support keeping bus route articles (I've even written one, The Witch Way), but until this gets a proper introductory paragraph explaining what links them it looks like synthesis. This is compounded by the lack of sources, which causes notability issues. And why is the 351 the first route to be mentioned when it isn't even in the title? This article offers more questions than answers in its current form. Given all the issuses, I have to say delete - although I very much hope someone can convince me to change my mind. Alzarian16 (talk) 20:18, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete - could not find independent reliable sources to establish notability. Also WP:NOTDIR and WP:NOTGUIDE.--137.122.49.102 (talk) 15:52, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Without sources, the subject fails WP:Verifiability. Jimmy Pitt   talk  16:19, 27 September 2010 (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.