List of locomotive classes: E.g. under British Railways and Great Western Railways only 3 or 4 out of dozens are randomly mentioned.  The list lacks structure with some of the section listing locomotives by manufacturer and other by operator and random individual locomotive articles.  Then there are whole continents that are not even mentioned (Africa) or only given minimal coverage (United States).  There are plenty of Locomotive by manufacturer or Locomotive by country lists, combining them into one article that would have thousands of entries is not of much benefit to anyone.  Only one cite is provided, that would only cover the Canadian section, but the article doesn’t have one, so effectively the list is uncited.  Hoekiema ( talk ) 01:59, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Close as out of process.  Hoekiema , it sounds like you're looking for one of the options listed at WP:ATD .  Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 02:29, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment , I was looking for a delete at the time of nomination, that hasn't changed, so no need to close the discussion prematurely.  Hoekiema ( talk ) 23:56, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Disagree this page is a result of a split of the page list of locomotives .  As a result, this list is technically still under construction.  -- ThylacineHunter ( talk ) 05:48, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment withdrawn Delete per nomination. Completely unecessary duplication. If anything is need it is simply a list of lists of locomotive classes. It also hurts me to see such a badly formatted article with links used in section headings. -- 10mmsocket ( talk ) 06:59, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Lists .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 07:22, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  This was recently created per consensus at talk:List of locomotives#Splitting proposal .  Yes it needs improvement, but AfD is not cleanup and there is no deadline.  I'm not sure what 10mmsocket thinks this is a duplicate of, but the point of split was to reduce duplication.  The work to enact that hasn't fully happened yet, but again that's not an AfD matter.  Thryduulf ( talk ) 09:06, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment The consensus reached on an AfD on another article doesn’t give a pass for a below par article to exist elsewhere.  It appears that as a result of the AfD, that article was improved and the issues moved here.  If editors feel that the article can be improved, but not within the timespan of this AfD, they can propose to move it draftspace and then put it forward for publication when done.  Wikipedia doesn't have list articles for every football stadium, railway station or school around the world because they would be too large and unweildly.  Instead there are more manageable list articles with boundaries, e.g. by city or country, or in the case of locomotives, by builder or operator.  If the article does remain it should solely be a list of lists, e.g Locomotives of the Great Western Railway , Locomotives of the London and North Eastern Railway etc, and not a list of individual locomotives as in the New Zealand Railways and Victorian Railways sections, each having 60 locomotives, and by global standards neither are big operators, so their would be even larger lists for others.  There are thousands of locomotive classes globally, listing every single one in a list that would go for a mile would be of no real benefit.  Hoekiema ( talk ) 23:54, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] That does sound like a better idea than making this page endlessly long.  I'll make a separate list for the Australian locos (currently just Victorian Railways).  -- ThylacineHunter ( talk ) 09:45, 22 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per Thryduulf.  Almost certainly meets NLIST.  Presidentman talk · contribs ( Talkback ) 21:13, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Meets NLIST, recently created per consensus, provides some context and references for items.  gidonb ( talk ) 22:47, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per Thryduulf.  It is in the process of being created.  Let that happen.  De Guerre ( talk ) 10:05, 22 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep due to ongoing expansion of the article.  TH1980 ( talk ) 02:48, 23 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  The extent of locomotive classes is not so large that the list is doomed to be indiscriminate , and this passes WP:NLIST .  While it was not in great shape at the time of nomination, WP:DEL-CONTENT notes that if editing can improve the page, this should be done rather than deleting the page .  Editing can improve the page—and has recently improved the page a good deal—so I see no reason to delete at this time.  — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 20:28, 23 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  It's raining! gidonb ( talk ) 13:55, 24 April 2023 (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.

Discussion outcome: keep