Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Doirani railway station

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:52, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Doirani railway station

[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)

No evidence of notability. It is unclear whether the article wants to be about the current line + situation (which the infobox is about) or the old station building (which is located in the same village but quite distant from the new one apparently). Sources added after the prod include a postcard[1], a source which doesn't mention the station[2], a source which has one line about the old station[3], and a blog, Most of the article is generic "history" repeated in countless similar Greek station articles. Fram (talk) 15:41, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Transportation, and Greece. Fram (talk) 15:41, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Merge it is almost always very significantly preferable to merge and/or redirect articles about verifiable but non-notable railway stations to a more appropriate article, in this is no exception. The information about the old station and a small amount about the new should be merged to Dirani#Transport; the information about the new station should be merged to a new list article about stations on the Thessaloniki–Alexandroupoli railway along with the others on the line (any that are individually notable should remain stand-alone articles with {{main}} links from the list). This title should probably redirect to the relevant section of the list article, which should obviously have a link back to the information about the old station, but I'm less certain of that. Thryduulf (talk) 17:19, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Seems well-sourced; it's longer than I expected. Usually we only see XYZ Station at milepost 123.4, and that's the extent of it. I'm biased in being a railfan, but is seems well-fleshed out as an article. Oaktree b (talk) 20:57, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Detailed and well-sourced article. No reason it shouldn't be about both the old station and the new station. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:10, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It's part of the wider set of articles concerning the railway network, and part of the history is specific to the station itself. I see no issue with notability. --Antondimak (talk) 10:20, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There's so many bare URLs (in Greek) that I can hardly make sense of what is even a reliable source. With that said, there's more here than your average train stub. This may well be notable enough for its own article, but I am concerned the sources are not reliable and/or do not give significant coverage. That there was both an old station and a new one does help with the odds that this is notable, however. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 18:07, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @Trainsandotherthings:, its work translating from Greek to English, and then decoding the salient points and sometimes I don't get everything done in one sitting ✠ Emperor of Byzantium ✠ (talk) 21:17, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Highly likely to have received coverage when opened and/or rebuilt.Garuda3 (talk) 16:15, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
WP:THEREMUSTBESOURCES. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 18:06, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Has recieved coverage and is well sources I entirley agree with User:Garuda3 and User:Oaktree b's statements that there is enough coverage and also one of main reasons some people are against keeping it is because the sources are in greek when it can be translated to english NotOrrio (talk) 07:31, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't say that was a reason not to keep the article. I don't appreciate the bad-faith accusations from you (plus the fact that you somehow only seem to comment in AfDs I have participated in). How about you stop hounding me before you end up blocked? Trainsandotherthings (talk) 13:57, 24 November 2022 (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.