Talk:North Western Railway (fictional)

This article was nominated for deletion on 8 September 2020. The result of the discussion was redirect.

This page was proposed for deletion by Piotrus (talk · contribs) on 5 August 2020.

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Children's literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Children's literature on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Children's literatureWikipedia:WikiProject Children's literatureTemplate:WikiProject Children's literaturechildren and young adult literature articles

Low

This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tasks you can do:

Here are some open tasks for WikiProject Children's literature, an attempt to create and standardize articles related to children's literature. Feel free to help with any of the following tasks.

Add {{Portal|Children's literature}} to the See also section of related articles.
Tag the talk pages of related articles with {{WikiProject Children's literature}}
Join WikiProject Children's literature and list yourself as a Participant in the project.
Cleanup: A cleanup listing for this project is available. See also the list by category, the tool's wiki page and the index of WikiProjects.
Deletion discussions: listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Literature
Notability: Articles with notability concerns, listed at WikiProject Notability
Rate the Unassessed articles in the Children's literature WikiProject.
References: Add references to Unreferenced BLPs.
Requested articles: Create a requested article on literature
Stubs: Improve a stub-class article

edit

Thomas

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Thomas, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Thomas the Tank Engine on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ThomasWikipedia:WikiProject Animation/Thomas & Friends task forceTemplate:WikiProject ThomasThomas articles

The route diagram template for this article can be found in Template:Sodor Railways.

Should this article be expanded to include detailed information on each of the NWR's lines or are the maps enough? Penrithguy 21:50, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stub status?[edit]

I'm fairly new to Wiki-editing, but should this article still be considered a stub?

EdJogg 11:57, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously not! Stub status was removed as part of Stubsensor cleanup project (you can help!), fixed on 25th July 2006.

Next time, I'll do it myself! EdJogg 08:05, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is not fictional[edit]

I believe it is real — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:6C5D:5100:166A:11F4:69CC:AE5B:4FBB (talk) 15:45, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal[edit]

@Piotrus, ACase0000, Acather96, Andrewa, Bakeshutwait, DDandT6, EdJogg, JeffreyLoeber, Penrithguy, Peter SamFan, Robin S. Taylor, and Stevensonmachine:There are a lot of these articles proposed for deletion at the moment, we need to unify their discussions. I'm not particularly experienced with AfDs, but could we make a single discussion for all of them?

There are a large amount of articles currently about The Railway Series and Thomas & Friends; almost all of these currently need cleanup, referencing, or deletion. If only we could revive WP:THOMAS, this would probably get sorted out very quickly, but as it is we have very few editors interested in this, and even less cohesion between them. I personally think that all the railway pages should be kept, but all the character pages deleted; but this needs wider discussion. WT79 ^{(speak to me | editing patterns | what I been doing)} 11:38, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We could simply object to all of these PROD requests, and refer the proposers to alternatives to deletion.

Merges are a very good idea. We unfortunately lost almost all of the active members of WP:THOMAS to the Thomas the Tank Engine wiki, where they continue to provide encyclopedic information, unhindered. And who can blame them?

But why bother? If we let the fancruft police delete these articles, readers will just find the Thomas wiki instead, which already has far better coverage of the topic. Wikipedia will be a little poorer but most of the damage is already done, and civilisation probably no poorer and maybe a little richer, as we and they can all then get on with improving articles which pass their criteria.

So instead, let us just make sure that the surviving articles in Category:The Railway Series and its subcategories refer to the Thomas wiki in their external links section. It may even be worth contributing a little to the Thomas wiki to make sure that they have a suitable page for a target for each of our surviving articles. I do not think they would mind at all.

I don't think the articles in Category:Lewis Carroll characters are in similar danger, but you never know. Andrewa (talk) 12:33, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that 99% of the content in those articles are WP:PLOT/WP:FANCRUFT, instead of reception/analysis/significance. Such content belongs on fan wikias, not Wikipedia. Therefore, merging it won't help = combining two or more bad articles still produces a bad article that needs to be deleted in the end. Now, the top level article about the franchise will of course stay, but for anything beyond it, WP:GNG/WP:NFICTION need to be considered. PRODs can be removed, but if the AfD ends up in snow-delete votes, then this is not a form of WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Frankly, I'd suggest interested editors to transwiki stuff (text, pics) to a relevant fan wiki: https://ttte.fandom.com/wiki/North_Western_Railway which will be very happy with the contributions. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:06, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with this proposal, but the problem is that we can't direct a user to TTTEwikia in the external links section, if the article does not exist to have any external links. Thus users mostly will give up at that stage, and not try to find a higher-level article on the topic which isn't deleted, and look at it's external links. This means that most users won't view the Wikia pages if they don't have at least a little amount of coverage at Wikipedia. WT79 ^{(speak to me | editing patterns | what I been doing)} 07:42, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

See also WP:Articles for deletion/Arlesdale Railway (2nd nomination). WT79 ^{(speak to me | editing patterns | what I been doing)} 07:56, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I argued in the past we should be able to link to a wikia/fandom in external links, but it seems this was not a popular idea. See Wikipedia_talk:External_links/Perennial_websites/Archive_3#Wikia if you care. As things are, we just delete things, don't link wikia, and hope people can use google, I guess. :/ --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:35, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Do not merge. It's pointless imo to merge un/badly sourced content. There are no inline citations as I write this. The one source in the bibliography looks unreliable. Just redirect this and if somebody wants to cite actually reliable sources, they can do that at the redirect target. Hog Farm _Bacon 01:50, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]