Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gippsland Railway

Gippsland Railway

Delete vote from me. See Talk:Gippsland Railway for why. Somebody in the WWW 00:11, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• Note: the talk page says:

"There is no railway called the "Gippsland Railway" or a line called the "Gippsland Railway line". The writing style of this article is bad and it is riddled with errors (i.e: RFR upgrades won't be completed until 2005) and does not fit in with the others railways in Victoria pages (see: List of regional railway stations in Victoria) which are categorised by line, not area. All the information on this page is confusing as it talks about multiple unrelated lines as being all linked to eachother. I vote it should be deleted. Somebody in the WWW 23:28, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)"

• Keep. Should be placed on WP:AWNB or on Wikipedia:Cleanup, not on VfD. Significant. Ta bu shi da yu 05:01, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. This railway is significant and played a siginificant part of the development of not only Gippsland but eastern Melbourne. Should be place on Cleanup. Capitalistroadster 11:04, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Keep, way more notable than Sollog (seriously, RRs are mostly notable) Wyss 23:17, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Keep on grounds of being notable and encyclopedic. [[User:GRider|GRider\^talk]] 23:47, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • I have fixed the article added sections on significance both for Gippsland and Melbourne and on tourism railways and rail trails. I have put the test of the original article into a section called services and hopefully tidied up the text. Capitalistroadster 10:33, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. The content is on its own notable, but this organisation (which effectively amounts to having "Railways by Region" articles) is illogical at best - and the "Gippsland Railway" is not known as a single entity. Ambi 10:36, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. Especially after that last re-write. It's got the potential to be useful and, IMHO, that's a good reason for keeping anything. P Ingerson 11:43, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)