Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Punggol Bus Interchange
This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was No consensus (defaults to keep). Ral315 05:06, September 13, 2005 (UTC)
A local Singapore bus station, currently closed. Pilatus 08:45, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. This interchange is very much in operation.--Huaiwei 11:26, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Keep. I don't like it, but there are numerous other examples of this kind of article at Category:Bus stubs. If they stay, this should stay as well. unsigned vote by khaosworks. --Nandesuka 12:22, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- This argument is fallacious. If we accept the premise that we should never delete an article because at least one other article of its kind exists on Wikipedia, it is likely that no articles can ever be deleted. If you think it should be deleted, then vote accordingly on this vote standing by itself, and deal with the "numerous other examples" in their own time. Nandesuka 12:12, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per Pilatus. Nandesuka 12:11, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, bus interchanges are notable, like metro stations. Randomly deleting articles is no way to build an encyclopedia. Kappa 12:43, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Welcome to Wikipedia, Kappa! Please familiarize yourself with some of our policies and guidelines, especially no personal attacks and Wikipedia:Assume good faith. Thanks in advance. Nandesuka 13:06, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't see a breach of either of those policies here. Please be careful in making such comments as if they lack sufficient justification they may themselves appear to some to be a breach of the no personal attacks policy. CalJW 18:24, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- CalJW, I'm afraid I don't understand you. What part of reminding someone about relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines could possibly be considered a personal attack? Please elaborate. As for my welcome message to Kappa, I thought it appropriate, since it is clear that Pilatus is not randomly deleting articles — whether you agree with his nominations or not, you surely must acknowledge that they are systematically focused on one topic at the moment — and describing such nominations as "random" is an argument addressed to the nominator, not to the content. Kappa correctly takes umbrage when people describe him as "always voting keep no matter what the subject" (and he doesn't — I've seen him vote delete quite a few times). I'm reminding him to extend the same courtesy to others with whom he disagrees. If you choose to interpret that as a personal attack, you are welcome to; I'm confident that your opinion will be in the extreme minority. Nandesuka 20:51, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- As far as I am concerned, its your words which beg to be understood. I too, do not find Kappa's comments contravening any wikipedia policy, and your message to him does appear overboard and inappriopriate to me. I suppose that makes me a "minority" as well?--Huaiwei 21:06, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- If you believe that politely reminding someone about relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines are a personal attack, then yes: I sincerely believe — and hope — that you are in the minority. If anyone else would like to discuss this, I suggest you drop by my talk page and comment there, rather than clutter up this vote page. Nandesuka 21:53, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- There is a major difference between a "polite reminder on wikipolicies" for a genuine case of policy violation and a "polite reminder on wikipolicies" where no clear-cut evidence of violation exists. Obviously, the issue is not whether a "polite reminder" is a personal attack or not. It is whether you somehow consider someone else's edit as a policy violation when they are not, which then amounts to a personal attack. You appear to completely miss the point there, delibrately or otherwise. Anyway, I do not think I need to go to your talkpage at this juncture, for I have nothing else worth saying, and I do not wish to continue on this discussion any further.--Huaiwei 16:38, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Wait, wait. I'm confused? Is Kappa new? Looking at his user/talkpage history I thought he's been here for a while. And the protocol of welcoming users is via the user talkpage? - Mailer Diablo 19:25, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- There is a major difference between a "polite reminder on wikipolicies" for a genuine case of policy violation and a "polite reminder on wikipolicies" where no clear-cut evidence of violation exists. Obviously, the issue is not whether a "polite reminder" is a personal attack or not. It is whether you somehow consider someone else's edit as a policy violation when they are not, which then amounts to a personal attack. You appear to completely miss the point there, delibrately or otherwise. Anyway, I do not think I need to go to your talkpage at this juncture, for I have nothing else worth saying, and I do not wish to continue on this discussion any further.--Huaiwei 16:38, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- If you believe that politely reminding someone about relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines are a personal attack, then yes: I sincerely believe — and hope — that you are in the minority. If anyone else would like to discuss this, I suggest you drop by my talk page and comment there, rather than clutter up this vote page. Nandesuka 21:53, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- As far as I am concerned, its your words which beg to be understood. I too, do not find Kappa's comments contravening any wikipedia policy, and your message to him does appear overboard and inappriopriate to me. I suppose that makes me a "minority" as well?--Huaiwei 21:06, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- CalJW, I'm afraid I don't understand you. What part of reminding someone about relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines could possibly be considered a personal attack? Please elaborate. As for my welcome message to Kappa, I thought it appropriate, since it is clear that Pilatus is not randomly deleting articles — whether you agree with his nominations or not, you surely must acknowledge that they are systematically focused on one topic at the moment — and describing such nominations as "random" is an argument addressed to the nominator, not to the content. Kappa correctly takes umbrage when people describe him as "always voting keep no matter what the subject" (and he doesn't — I've seen him vote delete quite a few times). I'm reminding him to extend the same courtesy to others with whom he disagrees. If you choose to interpret that as a personal attack, you are welcome to; I'm confident that your opinion will be in the extreme minority. Nandesuka 20:51, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't see a breach of either of those policies here. Please be careful in making such comments as if they lack sufficient justification they may themselves appear to some to be a breach of the no personal attacks policy. CalJW 18:24, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Welcome to Wikipedia, Kappa! Please familiarize yourself with some of our policies and guidelines, especially no personal attacks and Wikipedia:Assume good faith. Thanks in advance. Nandesuka 13:06, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as per Pilatus. Peeper 15:28, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep bus terminals. --SPUI (talk) 16:45, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete — utterly non-notable. — RJH 16:52, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Harmless, and must be relevant to thousands of people. CalJW 18:24, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- keep all roadcruft Roodog2k (talk) 20:01, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. WP:POINT - Mailer Diablo 20:05, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, verifiable. If anyone wants to merge that's okay too. JYolkowski // talk 21:56, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Wikipedia is not a guide to bus routes, it is an encyclopedia. Gamaliel 23:10, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep --Vsion 23:12, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete.—encephalonέγκέφαλος 03:02:58, 2005-09-07 (UTC)
- Delete - Not notable --Camw 06:56, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep bus terminals, schools, and battleships. —RaD Man (talk) 07:25, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete not notable --Mecanismo 18:34, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, bus terminals are not inherently notable. Lord Bob 01:15, September 8, 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. It is a temporary structure! Vegaswikian 04:54, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Bus interchanges are not notable, unlike a Metro station. Deleting superfluous and needless information is a good way to build an encyclopedia. Hamster Sandwich 00:17, 11 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. As per Hamster. / Peter Isotalo 21:53, 11 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete bus spotters' obsession (how many of these are there??????) --redstucco 08:43, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. There are 21 bus interchanges in Singapore. Too many for you? Seriously, am I right in suspecting more than half the people here cannot tell the difference between a bus stop and a bus terminal?--Huaiwei 13:32, 12 September 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.