Deletion of City network

Comment: The topic is quite notable as entire books are written about it - a selection follows.  The rest is then a matter of ordinary editing per ; ; ; ; ; &c
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Editing policy (WP:IMPERFECT||WP:PRESERVE||WP:ATD||WP:NOTCLEANUP||WP:BEFORE)

Comment: The basic premise of this article is that cities are nodes in transport and communication networks and this defines the purpose and development of the the city.  This seems quite self-evident to me, and that it is not OR has been well demonstrated by AndrewD's list of sources.  To add to that there is ''A Study on Globalizing Cities: Theoretical Frameworks and China's Modes'', particularly https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Xje6CgAAQBAJ&pg=PA61 chapter 3 which treats the idea in great detail.  Clearly meets .  I'm not seeing any specific examples of possible OR from those that are making that claim.  Until they do, their argument is just  or |vague handwaving
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:IDONTLIKEIT||WP:VAGUEWAVE)

Comment: and '''Comments''': Not |notable concept or idea. I change the unreferenced tag as there is "one" provided.  I am all for scholarly subjects on Wikipedia but there needs to be more than a "basic premise" and providing a list (above) written and/or co-written largely by Peter J. Taylor (Department of Geography, Loughborough University) and R. Aranya (Department of Urban Design and Planning Norwegian University of Science and Technology|,Trondheim, produced by "Regional Studies" where authors can publish their own work. Other co-authors are B Derudder, F. Witlox, G. Cataland, M Hoyler, and J Huang. These authors repeatedly show up in books printed by Taylor and Francis Group (a part of Informa where authors publish their own work) Urban Research and Practice (the same), and Routledge; part of Taylor and Francis Group. This should raise big red flags that the title is nothing more than |neologism. The sources I looked at, including those I could find above and other links (using 13 tabs and following many links) also included "national urban networks", "transportation and communication networks", "trade and finance networks", "intercity networks", "Mississippi and Great Lakes networks", "capacity network", and "infrastructure networks", All of these appear to be considered "nodes" or partitions. A "city network" per the article is also a "node". As far as a Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary|geographic definition there is confusion as to what "City network" actually means, as well as what it is part of, considering the other network "nodes". The term network in this context seems to fit many more instances from sources including "city-networks", "city-as-actor networks", "city-as-spaces networks", religious networks, city-regional networks, as well as the above mentioned "world city network", that does have more mention. A minor network can be a "canal network" that is allowing invasive fish to travel from the Mississippi to the Great Lakes. There would also be city to city networks, city to other country networks, and more
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:NEO||WP:notability)