- 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. Mailer Diablo 13:24, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Appears to be original research. Delete. --Nlu (talk) 06:54, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, it's definitely original research at the moment. But what this needs is references and a rewrite, not deletion. A quick search of Google[1] reveals that this is a widely-used term in the profession. Tag it for cleanup and rewrite. -- H·G (words/works) 07:43, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: I've asked the main contributor if he'd like to improve the article. [2]
- Nothing original about it. Have references for all of it. But don't have much time to add to it at the moment. Does Nlu think I made it all up?
--Michael Johnson 09:51, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually really don't care. If you want to delete it go ahead, and I'll return to the subject when I have more time.--Michael Johnson 09:52, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep: The article looks quite interesting, so we could try a dated cleanup tag for a bit. If no one helps, we can always delete later. If the subject is notable, a new article will arrive in due course. Stephen B Streater 10:05, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per H·G. --Wine Guy Talk 22:17, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep The overall term for procedures and systems that assist with the safe operation of trains and the protection of work sites and staff on rail infrastructure. Ste4k 03:49, 21 July 2006 (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.