Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rewari- Rohtak Train

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 speedy keep. Per WP:SK#1, the nominator withdrew their deletion nomination, and there are no outstanding !delete votes. (non-admin closure) Mz7 (talk) 00:04, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rewari- Rohtak Train

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

PROD removed by IP, no reason. This seems to be an unremarkable train service. TheLongTone (talk) 20:13, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Question - Why was this prodded for deletion only twenty-five minutes after it was created? [1] --Oakshade (talk) 02:39, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:21, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:21, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Not only does this service easily pass WP:GNG with very in-depth coverage from reliable sources like The Times of India, Zee News and The Indian Express [2][3][4][5] (and these are just English language sources in a very heavily Hindi-language dominated country), but this is typical train line that would never even be considered for deletion of it was in the United States or the United Kingdom, similar to the Providence/Stoughton Line or Ellesmere Port to Warrington Line. Might this be a case of systemic bias? --Oakshade (talk) 02:39, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I strongly support Oakshade. It is a well referenced article with valuable information. There is no good reason for deletion of this article. The article should be renamed 'Rewari-Rohtak line'. - Chandan Guha (talk) 04:26, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Oakshade (talk) 05:34, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Withdraw nomination, but rename since (as not clear in original article) this is a major infrastructure project.TheLongTone (talk) 09:27, 27 March 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.