Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wimbledon & North Line


 * 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. - Mailer Diablo 02:19, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Wimbledon & North Line


Appears to be a hoax - article is unverified and I cannot find any facts to back it up. Please see relevant discussion at Talk:London Underground --Harris 23:32, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as unverified/hoax, the Talk:London Underground people seem to have done a thorough search without turning up anything to support this. Creating user's other contributions do not inspire confidence. Demiurge 23:42, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. I think we can safely assume that if there was anything to this, the British rail and transit buffs would've populated this article with details and references already. Tubezone 00:33, 23 November 2006 (UTC) Redirect to Chelsea-Hackney line. Nothing useful to salvage from this article, it's just a guess-list of possible stations. Tubezone 00:39, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Cbrown1023 01:49, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, even if it's real (which I'm 100% sure it isn't), we can't have articles on "ideas" from Transport for London, WP:NOT a crystal ball and all that. Am convinced that rail buffs would know about this if it were even remotely true.--Canley 13:06, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as likely hoax, and echoing Canley, any proposed line worthy of note would be verifiable.16:52, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak delete because there's a grain of truth to this; the article basically describes the long-planned Chelsea-Hackney line, which deserves its own article, although it is unlikely to be built in the near future, and this is wishful thinking; likewise the title "Wimbledon & North Line" is the author's invention. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ProhibitOnions (talk • contribs)
 * Merge with the Chelsea-Hackney per above. Simply south 21:52, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Chelsea-Hackney / Crossrail 2 effectively cover this and should be expanded. I can't see anything in this worth saving. Regan123 22:22, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as per Regan123 (as nominator, thought I'd better confirm my point of view in light of the Chelsea-Hackney point) --Harris 22:24, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. WMMartin 18:20, 27 November 2006 (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.