Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kirkby train crash

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. Nomination withdrawn by proposer. Nthep (talk) 10:45, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kirkby train crash

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

One person suffered minor injuries when a train ran the buffers at the end of a platform. This sort of thing happens a lot, so it is hardly a noteworthy incident. Now it is clear, following conclusion of the prosecution, that it wasn't even serious enough for the driver to be jailed, it underlines the non-notability and this simply falls under WP:NOTNEWS. Suggest it should be deleted, but merge some of the content into Merseyrail and/or Kirkby railway station. 10mmsocket (talk) 22:22, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. 10mmsocket (talk) 22:22, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This "sort of thing" certainly does not happen a lot, at least in the UK, and easily meets WP:GNG. The level of punishment handed out is not an indication of the level of notability. — Voice of Clam 22:34, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Transportation. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:48, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I say it is notable enough to keep, although I think expansion of the page would be a good idea. — Thebrakeman2 (talk) 23:24, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Notable incident with widespread coverage over a WP:SUSTAINED period of time. NemesisAT (talk) 23:45, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep - I held off creating this one shortly after it happened. Forum chat was that there were unusual circumstances, which were later rumoured to be that the driver was using a mobile phone whilst driving. Per WP:BLP, I kept this allegation off Wikipedia when discussing at WP level until it had been reported by reliable sources.

Prosecutions of railway staff following railway accidents in the UK are extremely rare. There's Quintinshill, Wootton Bassett, and this one. There was also a prosecution after Great Heck, but not of railway personnel. It was the prosecution which shoved this one well above the notability threshold, and the reason the article should be kept. Mjroots (talk) 08:01, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

COMMENT it is clear already that there is already strong consensus to keep the article, so I am more than happy for this AfD to be closed. --10mmsocket (talk) 08:45, 9 March 2022 (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.