Deletion of Traingate

Comment: while  means that we shouldn't report every little thing, it has been given extensive coverage across all papers and broadcasters in the UK, and several elsewhere (some of which I have added to the article). Piggate and Ed Miliband bacon sandwich photograph seem to set a precedent here. In terms of the name "Traingate", there are already two references in there but I will find more and add them shortly
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS)

Comment: per . At the moment this is just a news item about a rather clumsy bit of campaigning. If this ever gets coverage in history books we can revisit this. Special:Contributions/86.17.222.157|86.17.222.157
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS)

Comment: per . There is no indication that the very minor day or two press reporting incident will have any lasting significance. Piggate and Ed Miliband bacon sandwich photograph are incomparable and had coverage over two years
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS)

Comment: WP is far too full of overdetailed standalone entries, stuffed with passing commentary, about relatively trivial incidents like this that have caused a temporary media frenzy, but which are far better referenced briefly as a minor event/issue in the bio of the politician concerned or another page – ie with a bit of perspective and due weight from an encyclopedic (rather than a media) perspective. That's what the subsections of the notability guidelines like  and  are about. The Ed Miliband photo and "Piggate" shouldn't have their own pages either, but they do, and since people can accurately but simplistically claim "it's got lots of coverage in reliable sources" or "meets GNG", these things end up being retained. Sadly, this is a losing battle
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:LASTING||WP:PERSISTENCE)

Comment: FFS does the 24-hour news cycle really bring out some unimportant events that fail the |ten-year test. This likely fails the ten-day test. &ndash;&nbsp
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Recentism (WP:10YT)

Comment: This incident is notable.  The most recent coverage is a remarkable boomerang: voters loved so upset about crowded trains that they actually love it that Corbyn faked a video on the issue.http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-traingate-virgin-trains-row-cctv-sitting-on-floor-passengers-overcrowding-a7217471.html  Coverage is intensive, significant, widespread a ongoing (here's a real time news search https://www.google.com/#q=Traingate&tbm=nws&tbs=sbd:1) - it passes 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: per .  This minor event has received so much publicity in the UK that, on the balance of probabilities, it is likely to have a long term lasting effect on a large number of people's perception of Corbyn (and perhaps also of Branson) in the UK.  We have seen similar effects with Piggate and the Ed Miliband bacon sandwich photograph.  Yes, in the minds of all good-thinking and well-informed editors here, they are trivial.   But to many of our potential readers they are significant, and it is reasonable to assume that they will continue to be significant.   We need to recognise the importance of social media - which has grown substantially since some WP policy statements were established.  It is our prime responsibility as editors to provide accurate well-sourced factual information about matters which are seen by readers as significant, including incidents like these - and they need to be treated as distinct incidents in separate articles rather than being mentioned and being given |undue weight in articles such as Jeremy Corbyn and Virgin Trains which are of an entirely different nature (though it will of course be necessary to link to this article from those articles
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:LASTING||WP:UNDUE)

Comment: As well as being a classic example of a |news article it also doesn't pass , particularly because there are no |Lasting effects and that it only affected |a local area
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS||WP:EVENTCRITERIA||WP:LASTING||WP:GEOSCOPE)

Comment: If anything a passing mention in the main Jeremy Corbyn article may suffice. This clearly is suffering from ism, and I would agree with the nom that this goes against 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Recentism (WP:RECENT||WP:NOTNEWS)