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 moot. Another editor has boldly redirected, which is the concensus so far. Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:46, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Northern Lights (train)[edit]

The Northern Lights (train) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Duplicated by Northern Lights (passenger train) which is more detailed and up to date TFoxton (talk) 22:44, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect- Why do we even need an AFD for this? Umbralcorax (talk) 22:51, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete' - Whats the point in redirect? Nobody knows the page exists and would ever use it. TFoxton (talk)

• "The Northern Lights (train)" is a plausible enough search term and redirects are cheap. This could have been redirected or merged without coming to AfD. • Gene93k (talk) 01:04, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:59, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:59, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:59, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as a redirect - In fact this might be a better title than "passenger train", so possibly move target here (leaving redirect). In either event the redirect is harmless. Peterkingiron (talk) 10:29, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect, of course. If you ever find two articles that are redundant with another, you can simply be bold and merge them. There's never any need for an AfD discussion, and never any harm in an ordinary redirect. AndyJones (talk) 12:27, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It already is a redirect! Peterkingiron (talk) 21:51, 13 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.