Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Holiday Special Express
=[[Holiday Special Express]]=
:{{la|Holiday Special Express}} – (
:({{findsources|Holiday Special Express}})
An article can probably be written about this, but as it stands, this is nothing more than a list of Indian states and a few random city pairings thrown in (no references for anything). Delete —SpacemanSpiff 07:12, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. -- —SpacemanSpiff 07:12, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- Note A reasonable list exists at List of named passenger trains of India for all trains in India. —SpacemanSpiff 07:17, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:35, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:35, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
- Delete as this list has no verifiable definition in accordance with WP:Source list, without which it is just a collection of loosely assoicated of topics without any externally validated rationale for inclusion in Wikipedia. A verifable definition is also needed to demonstrate that it is not the product of original research. --Gavin Collins (talk|contribs) 11:19, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- Delete - Holiday special trains change all the time (depending upon availability of rolling stock and tracks).And they are not named services. Also this article does not cite any sources and many of the services, look dubious.--Sodabottle (talk) 07:11, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
- Delete - It appears that most Indian train services have names, but I do not think we could have an article for each. This is in fact not one of these, but a type of service. It might be possible to construct an article about them, but the presetn article looks as if it is intended to contain a list of services. Like bus timetables, these are likely to frequent change and are essentially unmaintainable in an encyclopaedia. Once the creator gets bored nand goes away, the page will quickly get out of date and become worse than useless: it would be misleading and thus positively dangerous. The operators have an incentive to keep their sites up to date, and the best solution is ALWAYS an external link to theri site. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:51, 28 February 2010 (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.