Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pre Metro Operations

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. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 11:56, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pre Metro Operations (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

No significant coverage in reliable sources - fails WP:GNG. SK2242 (talk) 01:07, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. SK2242 (talk) 01:07, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. SK2242 (talk) 01:07, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. SK2242 (talk) 01:07, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: @Buttons0603:, do not "snowball close" an AfD on an article you created. If you believe the AfD has been opened in bad faith you need to open a thread at WP:ANI asking for administrative help on the issue. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 01:57, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I am not seeing how this is passing WP:NORG/WP:GNG. If better sources are found, please ping me so I can review them. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:41, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep Article certainly does require a major rewrite with a fair bit of pruning of uncited text, but not a reason to delete. Have read about often enough in secondary cites over the years to be reasonably confident enough exist to meet WP:GNG. Will put it on the to do list. Metro140 (talk) 04:08, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, a number of reliable sources are available, but they don't offer much more than is already contained in the British Rail Class 139 or Parry People Movers article. Maybe a merge to the former, but leaning to a delete. Metro140 (talk) 06:24, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge notable related content with West Midlands Trains then delete. Nightfury 08:51, 1 February 2021 (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.