Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Backshunt

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 keep. (non-admin closure) Extraordinary Writ (talk) 17:32, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Backshunt

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

There are no references on the article at all. Kind regards, JJK2000 (talk) 14:06, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I have never heard of this term. The article describes a shunting neck, which is a form of headshunt, for which we already have an article. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 14:30, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
keep but clarify I do get lots of hits for this, but it seems to be more commonly used in the context of mining. It doesn't help that the example layout in the article appears to be incorrect. From what I can determine, it's used in a terminal station layout as the stub piece of track to hold the motive power so it can run around the cars. And needs refs, of course. Mangoe (talk) 15:01, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:37, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, per WP:HEY, and the sources added to the article. SailingInABathTub (talk) 18:11, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, as for other recent nominations by same editor, perhaps all of which should be closed "Speedy Keep" as an administrative matrer. "There are no references on the article at all" is not a valid deletion rationale, and stating that reveals basic non-understanding of AFD. I provide other feedback to nominator at their Talk, at ongoing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reverse curve. --Doncram (talk) 23:21, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 17:11, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Currently only source #3 mentions the subject. However, there are more references in Google Books. Before nominating an article for deletion it's necessary to search for sources. It's part of the AfD process. Dr.KBAHT (talk) 22:40, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per WP:HEY, passes WP:GNG. DmitriRomanovJr (talk) 13:31, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per WP:HEY, passes WP:SIGCOV.4meter4 (talk) 16:43, 12 June 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.