Talk:Falaknuma railway station

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Falaknuma railway station. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080523155101/http://www.scrailway.gov.in:80/mmts/mmtstable.php to http://www.scrailway.gov.in/mmts/mmtstable.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:24, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Notability

This railway station article is a candidate for redirect to and merger with its parent railway system. It has insufficient verifiable material to be considered a comprehensive article.

This article, like many other India-railstation-stubs, has only one or two sources. The article is a recitation in text of characteristics and numbers from the Indiarailinfo website. Likewise, references to NDTV are not press, but are recitations of a similar database. These articles add no value to the user. Many were edited by rote or programmatically. They share the same sentence structure with attendant errors in style. A list of the trains that pass the station is problematic. It provides insufficient information to a traveler (notwithstanding WP is NOTTIMEABLE) and is likely to become stale in time anyway. Images of the station sign alone do not convey any useful information, except for the existence of the station.

There are 8,500 railway stations in India. It is not systemic or cultural bias to assert that they are not all notable. An article does not add value to a reader if it simply duplicates the information in NDTV or Indiarailinfo. This station is an example of a non-notable topic as described in Wikipedia:Notability_(Railway_lines_and_stations). There is no significant press coverage in English at least.

There are many thousands of railway and subway stations. The question is sometimes raised as to whether one of these places is notable enough for a standalone article. Wikipedia:Notability says: "A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject."

It may be considered that if enough attributable information is available about a station on a main system to verify that it exists, it generally is appropriate for the subject to have its own article. For proposed or planned stations, historic railways stations that only existed briefly, or stations on metro, light rail, tram, people mover, or heritage railway lines, if insufficient source material is available for a comprehensive article, it is better to mention the station in an article about the line or system that the station is on.

This post is my notification of intent to REDIRECT the station article to its parent rail line. If at such time as the station becomes notable and can support its own article, the original article text including infobox and photo of the station sign can be recovered from the REDIRECT history. Rhadow (talk) 14:35, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Redirect and subsequent article quality

In accord with my intent stated above -- and to which there was no objection posted -- I redirected this article. A few days later, there were discussions elsewhere about similar matters (Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Trains#RfC_India_railway_stations and Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Hapa_Road_railway_station). As a result of those discussions, this article was restored. From an administrative perspective it is a non-event. From a WP reader's perspective, it's the same as a new article. Imagine you were a New Page Patroller. Would this article pass muster? It relies solely on subject-published timetable data. From those schedules, various editors have asserted who uses the station and other original research. To wit, "Hyderabad has very good public transportation like RTC Bus service Railway service which serves a common man needs." The text of the article makes only one concrete assertion about the station itself, that it "is one of the oldest stations in the Hyderabad built by the Nizams." No reference supports that assertion. Does it have platforms? Does it have a ticket-sales counter? How many people use the station?
No, the article describes only what line it is on and what administrative section of the railway controls it.
Yes, the station deserves a mention in Wikipedia. Given the information we have, it belongs in the Hyderabad Multi-Modal Transport System. When the article can be fleshed out with information on the station, then fine, the article should reappear in all its glory. Until then and in its present state, the article is of little or no use to a reader. A sensible editor should see that the article is not ready for prime time; it's drivel. A new article gets the benefit of the doubt. This one, however, has had a decade to mature, which it apparently hasn't. We should strive for a higher standard. Rhadow (talk) 13:30, 1 February 2019 (UTC)