Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Guildford Shuttle

: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. MBisanz ^talk 22:51, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

=[[:Guildford Shuttle]]=

:{{la|Guildford Shuttle}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Guildford_Shuttle Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Guildford Shuttle}})

Another non-notable bus route. All sources bar one are from local press, which on occasion can contain dubious info. Nordic Nightfury 15:43, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Nordic Nightfury 15:43, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Nordic Nightfury 15:43, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:49, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Comment {{U|Northamerica1000}} This isnt an organisation. It is a bus service. Nordic Nightfury 17:29, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

::It's unclear if this is a company, hence the organizations delsort. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:30, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Delete. Coverage in a single local free advertising mag does not meet WP:GNG.Charles (talk) 17:54, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
Keep Actually, it does. I was going to say delete until I saw all these sources that are on the article. The Surrey Mirror is a reliable source, so why is it being questioned? . Class455 (talk) 04:08, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

::Its not about if the sources are reliable, as per below it is about if the information that the sources provide can be backed up by a secondary source. Having just one primary source, even if notable will not do. Nordic Nightfury 07:25, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Delete. Only one unique source which is local, no significant coverage from other secondary sources.Ajf773 (talk) 04:29, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Delete as non notable shittle, Fails GNG. –Davey2010^Talk 20:39, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

: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.