Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/West_Midlands_bus_route_97 References

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. → Call me Hahc 21 02:47, 4 April 2014 (UTC) reply

West Midlands bus route 97

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Yet another plainly non-notable West Midlands bus route article, citing only the bus company websites. I recently AfD'd one of them and this one is no better. I don't believe there's any chance of finding significant news coverage about this route to support a Wikipedia page. Wikipedia's not a travel guide or bus timetable, is it?!

I am also nominating the following related pages because they seem to be equally insignificant West Midlands bus routes, lacking any significant reliable third party coverage:

Sionk ( talk) 00:00, 28 March 2014 (UTC) reply

Thanks to Anomiebot I realise Route 97 was subject to a 2010 AfD with a delete result. As such it is a speedy deletion candidate. Presumably the discussion can continue here for routes 5 and 33? Sionk ( talk) 02:57, 28 March 2014 (UTC) reply
Delete. Bus route information is potentially useful to some but I really don't understand how someone would think an unremarkable bus route merits an encyclopedia article. Bus routes regularly change frequency, alter route, etc., and focusing on current details would only be appropriate in a travel guide, which Wikipedia isn't. There's nothing here to suggest that these are in any way more significant than most. We could really use some decent guidelines for bus route notability which would need to demand more content than basic details of the route, frequency, type of buses, etc. -- Michig ( talk) 09:15, 28 March 2014 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 15:38, 28 March 2014 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 15:38, 28 March 2014 (UTC) reply

Delete the lot - We don't need articles for individual routes .... After all we're an encyclopaedia not a bloody bus guide!. →Davey2010→ →Talk to me!→ 15:49, 28 March 2014 (UTC) reply

Does the inclusion now of the history section change anything? The route history was the real reason for the article (I should've uploaded initially, apologies) and I think this section has encyclopedic merit?? - Flagler32 ( talk) 22:35, 28 March 2014 (UTC) reply
Delete them all—none meet WP:GNG as they appear, and I'm unconvinced by the uncited history section in the route 97 article. Imzadi 1979 → 02:52, 29 March 2014 (UTC) reply
I've read the 2010 AfD comments. I would argue this route is notable, historically because of the unusual Midland Red/Birm City Transport arrangment/duplication of services and currently because of being the sole example of night service in WM (I've added a ref to Birm Airport news article). Out of a couple of hundred services, 97 is one of only four routes of significance mentioned on the National Express West Midlands page. History section is based on my own research - Flagler32 ( talk) 09:58, 29 March 2014 (UTC) reply

Unfortunately Wikipedia isn't the place to deposit personal research material. Maybe there are bus or transport websites which will be interested? Sionk ( talk) 13:59, 29 March 2014 (UTC) reply

Delete all. We need guidelines to prevent the repetition. It goes bus route, afd, delete, bus route, afd, delete. Szzuk ( talk) 20:38, 31 March 2014 (UTC) reply

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.