Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Birmingham bus routes 2 & 3

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. Cannot delete the others as they were not tagged with an AfD mesage.  Sandstein  14:12, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Birmingham bus routes 2 & 3 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Non notable bus routes, All fail GNG, –Davey2010^Talk 13:07, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also nominating:

I've split the column into 2 to make the page viewing easier, I've only nominated those that are extremely poor sourcing and couldn't find anything on each individual bus route, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 13:07, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:51, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:51, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:51, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - I generally agree with WP:BUSOUTCOMES that ordinary bus routes along ordinary streets are not considered to be notable unless they can be shown to have something notable about them. I don't believe any of these meet that standard. JMWt (talk) 14:48, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all except West Midlands bus route 11. The outer circle is beyond any reasonable doubt notable. (In fact may I ask you if you'd consider removing that from the nom?). All the others simply have no notability, even the inner circle (8) Jeni ^(talk) 16:05, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Ah thanks for spotting that Jeni - That wasn't meant to have been included, I've removed it now, Thanks again. –Davey2010^Talk 16:11, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• WM 8 has a commercially published book specifically about it, incorrectly in the "See also" section. You might need to withdraw that too.Charles (talk) 17:46, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• One book doesn't automatically make the route notable, You've never !voted keep on any bus route here so I'm assuming this is something to do with me !voting Keep on the DYK bus route ?, If you want you could always submit a DYK and have that article kept :) –Davey2010^Talk 18:23, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• I have no wish to keep it and this is nothing to do with your previous vote. I have recently pointed out that that routes have to be treated on their own merits so it would be a bit hypocritical to vote for a mass deletion. If none of them is shown to be notable in a few days I likely will do though.Charles (talk) 11:22, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all -Bloody hell, that's a lot of bus routes for deletion! But none of them seem to be notable. Is there a page we can redirect them to (e.g. A list of bus routes)?. Class455 (talk) 19:48, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Class455 - I never planned to nominate this many however I came across them accidentally, Couldn't find anything on them so thought screw it they can all go in one :), As far as redirecting goes I think the best that we can do is redirect to National Express (which would be pointless as these aren't even mentioned there), Other than that I don't think there's anywhere else these can be redirected too, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 19:54, 4 November 2016 (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.