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. General consensus to keep the article (non-admin closure). Class455 (talk|stand clear of the doors!) 12:55, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

List of bus routes in Malta[edit]

List of bus routes in Malta (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Nothing but a guide for commuters or tourists on Malta's bus lines. No evidence of notability. A maintenance tag has been present for three years and noone elected to (try to) resolve the issue. That should mean more than enough time has been given to allow this article to develop into something worth retaining. Surely all that's worth mentioning on Malta's bus transport can be inlcuded on Malta's articlethe article on Malta's public transport. Tvx1 02:00, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 02:01, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 02:01, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Malta-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 02:01, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep basically per my comments at the nominator's other related Afd. Main list of this type do seem to be allowed at WP:BUSOUTCOMES. This would seem to be not substantially different from a broad range of such lists for jurisdictions of various sizes around the world, grouped at Category:Lists of bus routes. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 02:31, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• WP:OTHERSTUFF. WP:BUSOUTCOMES does not dictate that every bus related subject is inherently notable. Notability always has to be substantiated. Moreover, we're not a mirror of the websites of bus company's.Tvx1 02:35, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• • Of course. But BUSOUTCOMES expressly allows for "suitable lists" that group individual lines. I'm interested in hearing what other, uninvolved editors have to say on the matter. Having a discussion is why I removed your speedy deletion tag. This isn't for you to settle. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 02:39, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • But it doesn't say every such list is suitable. You haven't provided any clear argument why this particular list is suitable. We already have an article on public transport in Malta. Why have a second dedicated to part of it, while the main article still has room for expansion?Tvx1 02:42, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
      • No, it does not. Note that the nominator has altered his nomination statement accordingly. (That's done typically at Afd in a more transparent fashion by using strikethrough -- but I know from our recent interaction you're not swayed by guidelines that aren't mandatory, so...). Shawn in Montreal (talk) 02:51, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
        • Please stop assuming bad faith. I have altered the opening statement yet again per your preference.Tvx1 02:58, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
          • It's not my preference, it's WP:AFDFORMAT. I'm simply repeating your words back to you, as the guidelines on changing Afd comments are no less sensible recommendations than the guidelines on not reverting when editors remove a speedy tag with explanation. Whatever the outcomes of yours Afds, you've made a right mess of things, on what should have been straightforward nominations. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 03:06, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as a legitimate fork of Malta bus, which seems notable enough. Some refactoring of both articles is going to be necessary in order to have them refer to each other as necessary. "Pepper" @ 03:39, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Malta bus is only 27kB in size at the moment. There's more than enough room left there to move whatever's suitable from this article to that article.Tvx1 05:02, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's possible, seeing as the changes in bus route operators and bus routes do parallel each other, but I think keeping the list and prose separate would be for the best. "Pepper" @ 05:36, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

But why? You have to give justified arguments why it should kept. Not simply that it should be kept.Tvx1 14:55, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - Usually I'm all for deletion of small non notable route lists however country capitals and or country route lists should be kept, The article could do with sourcing however editors should improve this not resort to deletion, Keep and improve. –Davey2010^Talk 18:52, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A tag requesting improvement has been in the article for three years, no one bothered to act upon it. That tells more than enough about the interest in it and the value of keeping it.Tvx1 19:40, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

IPs have been improving this for a good few years, What may be of no value to you may be of encycolopedic value to someone else, There's no limit as to when improvements to articles should be made. –Davey2010^Talk 20:14, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - Certainly a list of bus routes in a country where the bus system is the major form of transportation and carries up to a million passengers a week meets the requirements of WP:BUSOUTCOMES. CBS527^Talk 16:57, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Not of it the content is utterly encyclopedic, per the comment below. We shouldn't be keeping such lists just for the sake of keeping them. Wikipedia is not a database of bus lines, nor is it a travel guide.Tvx1 22:03, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per arguments above. Nördic Nightfury 08:41, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:NOTDIR, WP:NOTGUIDE, WP:NOTTRAVEL. Such list are often out of date and misleading. They are original research and serve no encyclopedic purpose. People should go to the operators' websites for route information where it is more likely to be correct. Many similar lists have been deleted and this should go the same way

• All capital route lists tend to be kept (List of bus routes in London being the perfect example), These lists don't ever become outdated because editors/IPs tend to regularly update them. –Davey2010^Talk 19:03, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• There are no notable routes in this list and no certainty that they will be up to date. Unencyclopedic fancruft.Charles (talk) 20:42, 4 February 2017 (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.