Talk:Abandoned railway station
I'm doing some more maintainance; listing VfD nominations that were "lost" because the nominator never actually listed them on VfD (Or maybe they were but didn't have a heading. I'm finding these through the Pages on Votes for Deletion category). For this particular page, I vote weak keep. Almost no useful content, but I believe it could be encyclopedic. Cool Hand Luke 04:37, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
This is not an appropriate Wikipedia article, right? Katherine Shaw 11:41, Oct 12, 2004 (UTC)
- Keep Harmless at worst. jengod 19:17, Oct 12, 2004 (UTC)
- Potentially legit topic (and strong interest of mine), although not the easiest topic to write a general article upon. However, delete unless rewritten and moved to somewhere less nonsensical by the conclusion of this VFD. Ambi 09:29, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Keep; good topic, article seems alright. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 04:43, Oct 29, 2004 (UTC)
- Keep It's a stub, and if expanded, could be interesting. Fg2 04:53, Oct 29, 2004 (UTC)
- keep, could turn into something interesting. Posiduck 06:17, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- I can see the promise in the title, but the article looks abandoned itself. List on cleanup. Average Earthman 08:53, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Abstain. Don't know if topic could lead to encyclopedic articles. However, shouldn't it be the singular of railways? --Improv 15:41, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Keep but move to proper name. Even I don't vote to delete this, but it does seem more like a pointer than a page, and the category system should obviate the need for those now. Geogre 18:19, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Keep and cleanup. This should involve fixing the name, and there's quite a lot of other stuff to do as well. Andrewa 21:10, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Keep and move to the right name. —siroχo 01:12, Oct 30, 2004 (UTC)
- Keep and move to the right name. -- Jmabel | Talk 02:48, Oct 30, 2004 (UTC)