Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2779 km

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
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. I see a consensus that this article fails

WP:NTRAINSTATION which is a notability guidelines so I'm closing this as Delete. Liz Read! Talk! 03:28, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

2779 km

2779 km (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

As the article says, a train station, not a settlement, even if it has a population. The Russian text is no more illuminating: of the four sources, three of them are either the census or derivations of it, and the fourth is "the most complete and accurate database of RCOAD codes and numbers of the Federal Tax Service Inspectorate of Russia" (acto the Bing translation). The station (a pair of platforms) is there, and a short ways off is what looks like a farm with a pair of house which could account for the census numbers. I'm having a hard time seeing this as a notable place. Mangoe (talk) 03:48, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's bordering on a
WP:TNT argument given that what's there is nothing at all like what station stop articles look like. I don't consider station stops notable per se though I would object to a redirect to the line/service in question, assuming it exists and has a listing of stops. Mangoe (talk) 18:34, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete - Does not meet the notability standard for train stations. –dlthewave 04:52, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We have never taken populated places as notable simply for having a population and a name. Mangoe (talk) 05:18, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:27, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 03:04, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete it's not even a physical station building, it's basically a dot on a map, perhaps marked by a signpost. Desolate, barren area with no historical importance, it appears. Oaktree b (talk) 15:37, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Fails
    WP:NTRAINSTATION. Folly Mox (talk) 03:37, 25 October 2023 (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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.