Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hull to York Line

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 merge to Hull & Selby Railway. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:58, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hull to York Line

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

Not a railway line. Article describes two services from List of Northern Rail routes . No such railway line as "Hull to York line" in the modern or historical record. Linked source is a timetable which does not use the term.

Comment the line is listed in the Template:Railway lines in Yorkshire and the Humber - the other lines in the section are easily verified eg http://www.wymetro.com/TrainTravel/traintimetables/RoutesAndTimetables/

Fail WP:VERIFY and possible invention Prof.Haddock (talk) 02:54, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As with the now-deleted Outer South London Line, this is another Wiki-invention for the service operated on a series of rail lines. The only reference given is an old timetable. The article thus fails verifiability and notability as the reflection of a railway service pattern which is contrary to WP:NOTTIMETABLE. Lamberhurst (talk) 15:59, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above - Non notable railcruft. –Davey2010 • (talk) 18:09, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

^Merge with Hull & Selby Railway. The latter lists the actual railway line. Simply south ...... time, department skies for just 8 years 01:34, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The line clearly exists in the physical sense, which is not covered elsewhere. We need to have some coverage of this route. G-13114 (talk) 02:17, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As noted above there already is proper coverage of the "line", under the correct/verifyable names eg Hull and Selby Railway, East Coast Mainline etc. The article is actually describing the path of a service - that service is already covered at List of Northern Rail routes. Any historical service information should be merged into the relevant articles, if it exists. (The other historically relevant line is York to Beverley Line, which I am working on. When I am finished it will definately note that Hull-York trains once used it. Prof.Haddock (talk) 02:34, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The issue isn't about the fact the line exists - it does - but rather the creation of an article based on bits of lines covered elsewhere to show a timetabled service. Lamberhurst (talk) 06:44, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:59, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:59, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~ unless there's a better title for the material - the name, though not common, is found in Hansard, the Journal of Transport History, and a book on the history of the East Coast Main Line. I don't see how the historical Hull and Selby Railway article is the best place for the information, when its topic doesn't appear to have existed since the 1870s. Perhaps I'm mistaken, but all the online references seem to discuss this period. Warofdreams talk 19:46, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The first reference is about the York to Beverley Line, as it the second. The third is a reference to the line originally called the Leeds and Selby Railway. These two lines are many miles apart and don't form any sort of continuous railway. I think the Hoole reference may be an error in the text because it actually is referring to a location in Leeds -eg Neville Hill/Cross Gates. - that can't realistic be said to be on any line or route that has ever existed between Hull-York.

Re: the "Hull and Selby" - that article covers the history of the line, under the original name. It is still in common use eg Electrification of Hull to Selby railway line 'will power future investment (Hull Daily Mail 2014) , BBC News : quote "The government has backed plans to electrify the Hull to Selby rail line"

Possibly the term "Hull to York line" might be valid for disambiguation. The current article is not good/correct/verifyable coverage. Prof.Haddock (talk) 02:25, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Hull and Selby Railway and refocus on that section of this route - comments above make it clear to me that article is the best place for this material. Warofdreams talk 20:48, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

comment in terms of the usage of the phrase for train services I can see there is an argument for a simple disambiguation page.Prof.Haddock (talk) 06:47, 9 July 2014 (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.