Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Route 128 Station
Route 128 Station was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was DELETE
This page is an advertisement for a train station. I don't see any evidence of its notability in the article. Acegikmo1 22:22, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Delete. Completely unencyclopedic and non-notable, unless it gets blown up or remodeled to look like the Venus de Milo or something. Is there a Wikitravel (or similar other Wiki) for this sort of thing? --Aponar Kestrel (talk) 01:41, 2004 Oct 12 (UTC)
- Delete. Even living just a couple of miles from this station and being able to confirm that the information is accurate, I can't pretend the station is notable enough to deserve its own entry. -- Antaeus Feldspar 02:03, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Delete. Not notable by a long shot. --Improv 03:39, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Delete. What Antaeus Feldspar said. South Station, Back Bay and Route 128 sort of go together in the sense that as far as I know all trains from New York, including the Acela (and the Metroliners before them and ...) stop at all three stations, and that's worth a mention somewhere if it isn't already. It certainly doesn't need its own article, though. It's not a local landmark. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 16:21, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Keep. This article contains valuable information for people traveling to or from the area. It is clearly written and organized. Look at List of Washington metro stations. You'll find a list of eighty-six stations, each with its own article. Check out List of Sydney railway stations. You'll find dozens of articles already complete, and the structure in place for many times that number. Anybody for London? The list even has a section for closed stations (some of which have articles). London's so big, it even has two more lists of railway stations. Is every one of them notable? I lost count of Paris stations --- there must be over five hundred articles. Go to Montreal or Category:Mumbai railway stations or Hong Kong. If we prioritized Wikipedia's thousand or so articles on railway stations, where would Route 128 fall? Dead last? I don't think so. This is a competent, utilitarian article. Keep. Fg2 11:03, Oct 16, 2004 (UTC)
- Keep. There is vast precedent for this type of article. The great interest in passenger rail transport on Wikipedia is evident. An entire Category:Train stations exists with several subcategories. See also List_of_railway_stations, which in turn is broken down by country. Then there is Category:Metro which also includes many subcategories and stations (a merge may be in order). More broadly, under Category:Transportation there are articles on most airports (Category:Airports), individual highways (Category:Roads) (including Massachusetts State Highway 128), even a Category:Hiking trails and a List_of_cycleways. Route 128 is a major intercity and commuter rail station in the Boston area. It was recently rebuilt at a cost of several hundred million dollars. It is a model intermodal facility. The Route 128 Station article also contains detailed information on accessibility, which can be of considerable value to people with physical limitations who might want to know just what they will find if they go there. If Route 128 Station is inappropriate, there are hundreds if not thousands of train station articles that should be expunged. I think the people who took the trouble to create all those articles should be counted as implied votes for Keep. --agr 01:48, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.