- 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 redirect to Railfan. Cirt (talk) 02:47, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Train chasing (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Article does not assert notability. VG ☎ 18:13, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No notability, just over 6000 hits on Google, no references, only one author, etc. Bsimmons666 (talk) 18:45, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete even if I do not like the google way of testing a notabillity this article is clearly not notable and it also has got no real sources. abf /talk to me/ 19:23, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect to Railfan. No content here that is useful though- activity of train chasing/spotting and photography covered in that article. Nerdluck34 (Nerdluck34) 10:26; 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- Redirect as per Nerdluck34. Is is something I do quite often but there isn't any proper sources for it other than railfan forums, and the article will end up stuck as just a dictionary definition. Wongm (talk) 12:50, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. -- VG ☎ 13:59, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete On notability grounds. The article just isnt encyclopaedic Deckchair (talk) 16:09, 1 October 2008 (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.