Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lahore Rapid Mass Transit System

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. However, the "Lines" section will be blanked and listed at WP:CP as there are clear copyright problems in respect of this source. Mkativerata (talk) 22:23, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lahore Rapid Mass Transit System

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

Nothing to claim as notable above other transit systems as far as I can tell; the refs used to verify any of this are dead; and the article borders on WP:CRYSTALBALL. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 06:52, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There is no policy or guideline requiring a claim that this transit system is more notable than other transit systems. I have repaired one link so that only one is now broken. These links, particularly this one, support the claim of notability and provide suitable reference for discussing future developments, as required and allowed by WP:CRYSTAL. However, the close similarity in wording between parts of the article and here is concerning. In-line citation should be introduced and some re-writing undertaken. However, the copied material is largely in the form of lists of places so the concern is less than for creatively written text. None of these matters justify article deletion. Thincat (talk) 11:06, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The old URL for the DAWN piece still works and it wasn't really necessary to change. (I have my suspicions that the old URL is less liable to break in the future than the replacement.) In fact, out of the 7 external hyperlinks in the article, only 1 is in fact a dead hyperlink. All of the others work now just as they did (presumably) for the article's creator back in August of this year. Where did the idea that the hyperlinks were dead come from? Uncle G (talk) 11:37, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Nonsensical AfD rationale as most hyperlinks to sources establishing notability, including Thincat's above, are working. Even if they weren't, hard-copy sources are just as valid. With a city of a population of about 10 million, this is probably the largest city's transit system I've seen up for Afd. --Oakshade (talk) 15:48, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. -- Jclemens-public (talk) 18:10, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. -- Jclemens-public (talk) 18:10, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep planned mass transport system in one of the largest cities of the world--Wikireader41 (talk) 23:35, 19 December 2010 (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.