Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Track access controller: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Olana North (talk | contribs) →Track access controller: KEEP - No prior discussion on talk page to delete and/or merge |
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Added missing end tags to discussion close footer to reduce Lint errors. (Task 12) |
||
| (12 intermediate revisions by 12 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
<div class="boilerplate metadata afd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.''
<!--Template:Afd top
Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links in order to create a new discussion page using the name format of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGENAME (2nd nomination)]]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->
The result was '''keep'''. [[User:Wizardman|<span style="color:#060">'''''Wizardman'''''</span>]] 13:55, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
===[[Track access controller]]===
:{{la|Track access controller}} (<span class="plainlinks">[{{fullurl:Track access controller|wpReason={{urlencode:AfD discussion: [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Track access controller]]}}&action=delete}} delete]</span>) – <includeonly>([[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Track access controller|View AfD]])</includeonly><noinclude>([[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2008 April 26#{{anchorencode:Track access controller}}|View log]])</noinclude>
Line 10 ⟶ 17:
*<small>'''Note''': This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Transportation|list of Transportation-related deletion discussions]]. </small> <small>-- '''[[User:Iain99|Iain99]]'''<sup>[[User talk:Iain99|Balderdash]] and [[Special:Contributions/Iain99|piffle]]</sup> 09:40, 28 April 2008 (UTC)</small>
*<small>'''Note''': This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/England|list of England-related deletion discussions]]. </small> <small>-- '''[[User:Iain99|Iain99]]'''<sup>[[User talk:Iain99|Balderdash]] and [[Special:Contributions/Iain99|piffle]]</sup> 09:40, 28 April 2008 (UTC)</small>
*<small>WikiProjects notified: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject London Transport|WikiProject London Transport]] and [[Wikipedia:WikiProject UK Railways]]. [[User:Slambo|Slambo]] [[User talk:Slambo|<small
*'''Keep or merge''' The main 'sin' is the lack of sources to back-up the content. Whether the article should remain stand-alone or be merged-in with one of the other [[London Underground]] articles is another matter. Either way, the content is worth retaining. [[User:EdJogg|EdJogg]] ([[User talk:EdJogg|talk]]) 12:42, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
*'''Strong Keep'''
*'''Comment''' While I suspect that sources could be found to write a decent article on the subject, a lot of the current content is very poor indeed. The sins go well beyond a simple lack of sources: there's a great deal of unattributed opinion, much of which seems designed to puff up the importance of the job. "''The post of Track Access Controller is highly sought after...''", "''If you are ever stranded in the morning due to "overrunning of engineering work" you can be sure that a Track Access Controller somewhere is working hard to get the problem resolved for you''", "''Between them they have a wealth and breadth of knowledge that is the envy of other London Underground departments''" and numerous other examples. Merging this sort of material is a bad idea... if it is kept it would need to be severely pruned if not cleaned up quickly. '''[[User:Iain99|Iain99]]'''<sup>[[User talk:Iain99|Balderdash]] and [[Special:Contributions/Iain99|piffle]]</sup> 13:34, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
*:[Comment] OK, so some of the wording is poor, granted, it is unlinked and barely categorised, but the 'main' sin remains the lack of sources. A little rewording could easily change this from unsourced POV to unsourced content (:o)): "''T~ A~ C~ positions attract large numbers of applicants''", "''A T~A~C~ is responsible for managing engineering over-runs and minimising consequent delays.''", "''a T~A~C~ requires a knowledge of the entire Underground network''", etc. However much pruning might be required, merging is greatly preferable to deleting, and the unpruned version gives other editors greater scope for filling in the detail appropriately. [[User:EdJogg|EdJogg]] ([[User talk:EdJogg|talk]]) 13:58, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' I read the article twice, cleaned up what I could, and I still can't tell exactly what a Track access controller is. There were major [[WP:PEACOCK]] issues and I fixed some of them. It reads like a recruitment posting, not an encyclopedia article. If reliable sources can be found, this article can be recreated later, but as is, if I were to paraphrase the article, i would only be able to come up with "they work with the London Underground safety stuff, they much be really really really really really really really good." -[[User:Verdatum|Verdatum]] ([[User talk:Verdatum|talk]]) 16:19, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', Wikipedia is not tfl.gov.uk. [[User:Stifle|Stifle]] ([[User talk:Stifle/wizard|talk]]) 19:31, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
*'''Slash and Merge''' The text looks like a copyvio of a job posting, but the bare facts are mergeable with LU ''if true'' though. [[User:MickMacNee|MickMacNee]] ([[User talk:MickMacNee|talk]]) 19:48, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
*'''keep''' but give it a decent wikify and copyedit. --[[User:AlisonW|AlisonW]] ([[User talk:AlisonW|talk]]) 09:01, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
*'''Scrape clean and start anew'''. We have a [[grand slam]] here - an orphaned, deadend, unreferenced article that, despite all the work performed on it since the opening of the AfD, still reads like a magazine article or the beginning of an editorial/opinion article. [[User:B.Wind|B.Wind]] ([[User talk:B.Wind|talk]]) 03:56, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
*'''Weak keep''' - this is surely a subject worth having an article about, although perhaps this article is not it right now. I'd like to see it improved, and there doesn't seem to be much interest in doing so, but the peacock wording seems largely gone...let's give it a chance. <small><span style="padding:2px;border:1px solid #000000">[[User:Frank|<span style="color:cyan;background:blue"> Frank </span>]] | [[user_talk:Frank|<span style="color:blue;background:cyan"> talk </span>]]</span></small> 11:31, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
*'''Weak Keep''' per Travellingcari. --[[User:SmokeyJoe|SmokeyJoe]] ([[User talk:SmokeyJoe|talk]]) 13:45, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>
| |||