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 delete. J04n(talk page) 16:17, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

List of TriMet bus routes[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Wikipedia is not a travel guide. This article is almost entirely unsourced and the only source cited is the bus company's official web site. This list is unlikely to ever be useful to anyone planning to take a bus in Portland because they would have to check the bus company's web site anyway, to find out whether the route still exists, where to catch the bus, and when it runs. I recommend deletion. Metropolitan90 (talk) 05:55, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Transwiki to Wikivoyage where there is no requirement to be encyclopaedic, or notable and scope is on useful travel information. Stuart.Jamieson (talk) 07:54, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete-All of this can be found on tri-met's website. PortlandOregon97217 (talk) 09:12, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. No evidence of notability.--Charles (talk) 14:08, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Transwiki per Stuart.Jamieson. --TKK ^{bark !} 22:09, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 13:13, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 13:13, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 13:13, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mediran (t • c) 09:54, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I've transwikied this article to Wikivoyage. Check it out at List of TriMet bus routes. Northamerica1000^(talk) 10:21, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

that's not a transwiki, you've cut and paste copied without taking the editing history (a proper transwiki takes the whole editing history across)the result is that your new article is a copyright violation and will have to be fixed or deleted. Stuart.Jamieson (talk) 13:28, 23 January 2013 (UTC).[reply]

delete per WP:NOT - this list is outside the scope of what an encyclopedia would be expected to do, and as others have said, the lack of any kind of guarantee that the page is up to date makes it pretty useless to the reader. I wouldn't worry too much about copy-pasting to WV, as it's just a collection of facts, and therefore I don't think there's anything covered by copyright in the page. -Pete (talk) 14:34, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
delete per Pete and others. The section on current routes adds nothing to the info. on TriMet's own page except wikilinks, and the latter are of dubious value here. I've edited this list several times, but my edits were mainly just to fix major errors (mostly resulting from service changes or mistakes by other editors), and from the day the article was created I felt it was, as Pete wrote above, outside the scope of what an encyclopedia would be expected to do, and simply duplicates info. on TriMet's site that will be kept up-to-date much better there than here. The section named "All-time route history" (previously named Former routes) has numerous problems, some of which I noted two years ago on this article's talk page and others on the TriMet article's talk page (9-9-2012 post). None of the sourcing problems with that section has ever been addressed, and that does not surprise me, because I believe it's not possible to fix them without disregarding WP:V and WP:RS. That section was originally added it to the TriMet article, and I moved it to this article only to avoid continuing an argument with its creator over deleting it, but I've always felt it should be deleted without replacement. SJ Morg (talk) 15:07, 29 January 2013 (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.