Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Woodburn Junction


 * 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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 18:07, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Woodburn Junction

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Page cites no sources, clearly fails WP:GNG. Rly junctions generally do not merit their own articles. Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 18:03, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and England. Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 18:03, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Does not appear notable. I get a few hits for collisions which occurred at or near the junction, but nothing else. Not opposed to a redirect if a valid target is identified. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 00:57, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Agree with nominator about WP:GNG. The joy of all things (talk) 06:20, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete -- Seems to be not notable and without any reliable sources. --不和の林檎 (talk) 07:39, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. Although there are some notable railway junctions in existence, I could not find any sources to support this particular junction's notability. In fact, I could only find mentions of collisions, as well as unrelated search results for somewhere in Iowa. – Epicgenius (talk) 15:14, 22 September 2022 (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.