460:: It's a minor concept of railway platform arrangement, nothing more. The limited sources available only prove it exists; they don't prove any of the claims about its origin or the details of its usage. The list of examples is completely uncited and includes a number of other arrangements that vaguely resemble this. Additionally, there's no proof that those stations were actually intended to use the Spanish solution, or whether they simply happen to have this platform arrangement.
841:, even if outsiders can spend five years wondering whether it is a term of art or not. Now, once one understands this is a highly relevant and usable industry term, what could be more natural than citing examples of its current and past use? The article stands on its own and is quite useful as is; any small weaknesses should be addressed by interested editors, and remember: AFD is not cleanup.
254:. I've found a few blogs and other non-RS which use the term, but they are all newer than this article. As far as I can tell, this is an invented term, with no preexisting usage, and what sources do exist out there have just picked it up from us. I don't think there's any doubt that the concept actually exists in rail stations, but the name appears to be invented.
882:
You are also mistaken that sources do not give the history. Its origins in 1930s
Barcelona is well established in multiple sources. I also linked a source which verifies that São Paulo, Paris, Boston, China, Japan, and Germany have used this solution. The same source also points out that declining
784:
It seems pretty clear this is heading to a merge. I have no fundamental problem with that, but the long list of examples is pure cruft and should be left behind. Of the material that seems appropriate to merge, the problem is that it's all unsourced. I'm marked up the current article to highlight
836:
would have (and has) revealed. The nom should have been withdrawn at that point and it is quite, quite improper to now piggyback on the majorly flawed OP to raise extraneous "arguments" for anything other than a straight keep. The railway industry term "Spanish solution" is quite important in the
860:
happen to have that platform layout. A list that would be equally well served by a category, and completely fails to prove whether stations were constructed for one-way passenger traffic or not. This AfD is being conducted because the article is not possible to clean up to any reasonable standard.
859:
All that has been established by sources is that the term exists, and has for a while. Not its actual history, not any of the claims about its advantages. So once you take out everything that's unproven, what you're left with is a two-sentence lede plus a completely useless list of stations that
878:
source I linked above discusses possible advantages for
Toronto "Theoretically, this could cut dwell times by half" and "...the new arrangement with platforms on either side of the single track was an excellent opportunity to test the Spanish Solution and show how it could speed up loading and
607:
Also, state-owned rail operator
Deutsche Bahn and DB Netz AG use the term in their documents and on their websites regarding the construction of the second munich s-bahn trunk line. I know that's neither indepth coverage nor a reliable third-party source, but it shows that the term is used in
802:
798:
626:
I also found two PDFs from the
Bayerisches Staatsministerium für Wirtschaft, Verkehr und Technologie (Bavarian ministry of economic affairs and transport), and one from the Eisenbahn-Bundesamt (Federal Railway Authority), mentioning the German "Spanische Lösung".
598:
590:
568:. The German article on this topic (Spanische Lösung) was created on February 18, 2005. According to the dewiki article, the spanish-solution concept is also referred to as "Zwillingsbahnsteig" (lit. "twin platform"), cited in the dewiki article with a
423:
417:
411:
405:
687:. Verifiable but of dubious notability, essentially an aspect of railway platform design and should be covered there. If one omits the crufty list of stations that use this, the remainder would fit nicely into an existing article.
602:
594:
588:
A gbooks search in German for "spanische lösung bahnsteige" seemed more useful, with some hits to books from pre-2005 in German, so the term "Spanische Lösung" was used before the creation of the dewiki & enwiki articles.
645:. The biggest problem with the article in its current form is a lack of sources and the super long list of example stations (almost all without references/sources). Regarding keep/merge/delete, im undecided for now. (Maybe
508:. If the concept does originate in the 1970s (as appears to the case), it may be that there are good sources which don't have an electronic footprint. The 1970s-1980s are particularly bad in that regard for rail transport.
813:, so now at least one station has a reliable, third-party source. All other cn-tagged statements remain unsourced; if sources verifying these can't be found, there won't be that much content to merge then, i guess.
206:
338:
401:. There's not much out there. Most uses seem to be in primary sources (i.e. conference papers). Many of the uses of the term "Spanish solution" aren't even applicable to trains. For example,
575:
636:
415:
The
Spanish solution of introducing the European standard on the stretch of high-speed track between Madrid and Seville, means that the peninsula will in future have two different networks
425:, indicating the author doesn't consider this standard or accepted usage. On the other hand, we've got an entire article about it, and use the linked term in many articles. This fails
805:), both can be read online on gbooks, although in German. The lead now briefly summarizes the Spanish solution concept with these sources. Just for the sake of it, i also added one
613:
296:
159:
514:
might be a good place to start. Per Pi.1415926535 the list in the article is a real problem, and if you remove it you're left with a thinly-sourced dictionary definition.
200:
315:
632:
633:
Standardisierte
Bewertung des Vorhabens 2. Stammstrecke - Startkonzept (on behalf of Bayerisches Staatsministerium für Wirtschaft, Energie und Technologie)
106:
91:
642:
583:
832:- clearly the initial entire rationale for advocating the deletion of this page couldn't have been more wrong! The term existed before, as a
166:
132:
127:
136:
621:
994:
574:
An online-search for the German term "spanische lösung" gave some results, with the majority being passing mentions newer than 2005. (
475:
666:. Per the various rebuttals to deletion, the sources found prior to this article, and the others that have already appear afterward.
584:
CDU Region
Stuttgart proposal from 19/10/2015 to refit Stuttgart S-Bahn trunk line stations with spanish solution platforms (non-RS)
579:
119:
281:
don't yield any better results. Lots of blogs, mirrors, and other non-reliable sources, but nothing that predates our usage. --
806:
221:
86:
79:
17:
569:
393:
Thank you for that. I've done some more searching. I'm now convinced that the term did indeed exist prior to wikipedia (so,
510:
188:
609:
419:. And, even in sources which are in fact talking about the subject of this article, the term is used partially in quotes,
810:
720:
641:
I'd say the spanish-solution concept could be a suitable article topic, if sources allow for an article that isn't just a
617:
479:
but I can't say for certain that the information didn't come from
Knowledge. Another 1970s book that mentions the term
413:. Even in the context of trains, it doesn't always refer to the idea of opening the doors on both sides of the train:
100:
96:
912:
Transit
Toronto is a web site wherein fans of the Toronto Transit Commission have gathered information on the system
1007:
940:
735:
182:
1047:
480:
40:
483:
818:
772:
654:
1030:
998:
976:
953:
925:
894:
869:
850:
822:
792:
776:
753:
726:
699:
675:
658:
576:
Münchner Merkur article about the planned "Hauptbahnhof
Bahnhofplatz station" (passing mention of the concept)
552:
521:
496:
469:
444:
388:
368:
352:
326:
307:
288:
272:
61:
178:
889:
865:
671:
547:
491:
465:
383:
347:
1043:
972:
749:
341:
from 1979. It's obviously a notable concept so would be a keep even if the article title was an issue.
258:
228:
123:
36:
950:
846:
628:
610:
DB Netz AG website about the planned "München Hauptbahnhof Bahnhofplatz station" mentions the concept
629:
Bahnausbau München: Machbarkeitsstudie Vertiefende Untersuchung 2. S-Bahn-Stammstrecke Dezember 2002
814:
768:
650:
518:
214:
1026:
922:
884:
861:
789:
667:
542:
486:
461:
441:
378:
365:
342:
285:
269:
361:
Hmmm, your google-fu seems to be stronger than mine. What search did you run to find that? --
989:
707:
per Sandstein. Content is verifiable and notable, just not enough to warrant its own article.—
622:
2. S-Bahn-Stammstrecke München Erleuterungsbereicht Planfeststellungsabschnitt 3neu 18.02.2010
319:
300:
194:
75:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
1042:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
968:
833:
764:
745:
684:
115:
67:
57:
409:
the only viable Spanish solution to the problem of Indian control was the interpreter-scout
842:
430:
984:. Delete premise seems to be flawed that numerous sources have been found. I would also
690:
532:
515:
883:
passenger numbers can cause the system to be abandoned citing New York as an example.
1022:
964:
919:
786:
646:
438:
434:
362:
282:
266:
967:
and this AfD was based on a faulty premise. o idea why this hasn't been closed yet.
403:
Therefore, the Spanish solution, autonomy for Gibraltar's government within Spain...
903:
714:
708:
614:
Deutsche Bahn AG PDF about the planned "Marienhof station" (mention of the concept)
247:
538:
153:
907:
618:
DB Netz AG website about the planned "Marienhof station" (mention of the concept)
374:
580:
Stuttgart Journal article about regional budget (passing mention of the concept)
426:
398:
394:
243:
239:
53:
637:
Federal Railway Authority (insert super-lenghty and complex german title here)
988:
since it would seem undue on a general article about railway platforms. ----
421:
In view of the anticipated low loads, the "Spanish" solution is not necessary
785:
statements which need supporting references before they can be merged. --
570:
PDF doc from Brandenburg University of Technology Cottbus (November 2005)
477:
397:
is no longer a valid argument), but I'm still not convinced this meets
767:
would be appropriate (without the unsourced example stations list).
874:
You are mistaken that sources do not discuss the advantages. The
541:
verifies the Munich S-Bahn, at least, has the "Spanish solution".
1038:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
1010:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
943:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
738:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
763:: After thinking about it for some time, i'd say merging to
474:
Two pages that verify the Barcelona origin of the term are
914:, and a bit later on, the authors describe themselves as,
595:
Städtische Untergrund-Verkehrsbauten, Band 2: 1970, p. 48
262:
149:
145:
141:
837:
industry, for those familiar with the industry, i.e.,
537:
The origin is the 1930s in Barcelona, not the 1970s.
213:
246:. After extensive searching, I can't find a single
1021:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
949:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
744:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
297:
list of Transportation-related deletion discussions
809:stating/verifying the use of Spanish solution at
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1050:). No further edits should be made to this page.
314:Note: This discussion has been included in the
295:Note: This discussion has been included in the
250:which predates this article that uses the term
908:https://transit.toronto.on.ca/spare/0011.shtml
227:
8:
107:Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
564:: I found some stuff, but most of it isn't
257:This was first discussed five years ago at
608:somewhat official/rail-industry context. (
316:list of Spain-related deletion discussions
313:
294:
963:The sources provided are enough to pass
599:Handbuch Eisenbahninfrastruktur, p. 37
7:
591:VDI-Lexikon Bauingenieurwesen, p. 63
482:in addition to the one linked above
916:a group of people known as railfans
24:
603:S-Bahn München: Alba, 1997, p. 59
265:in our own railroad articles. --
879:unloading times at Bloor-Yonge."
566:reliable, third-party, published
92:Introduction to deletion process
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
511:Transportation Research Record
1:
259:Talk:Spanish solution#Sources
62:08:50, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
1031:04:01, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
999:03:48, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
977:12:44, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
954:18:35, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
926:23:46, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
895:23:29, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
870:22:49, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
851:18:20, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
823:19:28, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
793:14:32, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
777:11:41, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
754:00:39, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
727:23:14, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
700:19:57, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
676:05:03, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
659:20:00, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
553:18:24, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
522:13:48, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
497:22:40, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
470:21:09, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
445:13:28, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
389:07:21, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
369:23:32, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
353:18:42, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
337:. Almost immediately got a
327:18:17, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
308:18:17, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
289:18:20, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
273:18:05, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
261:. Sadly, the term now has
82:(AfD)? Read these primers!
1067:
839:the subject matter experts
797:I added two book sources (
375:"Spanish solution" trains
1040:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
1018:No clear consensus yet.
782:Comment about merging.
649:could be a solution?)
643:dictionary definition
80:Articles for deletion
373:The search term was
1016:Relisting comment:
811:München Karlsplatz
279:Barcelona solution
1033:
956:
951:Black Kite (talk)
807:newspaper article
756:
698:
329:
310:
277:PS, searches for
97:Guide to deletion
87:How to contribute
1058:
1020:
1013:
1011:
948:
946:
944:
765:Railway platform
743:
741:
739:
723:
717:
711:
697:
695:
688:
685:Railway platform
536:
376:
324:
305:
252:Spanish solution
232:
231:
217:
169:
157:
139:
116:Spanish solution
77:
68:Spanish solution
34:
1066:
1065:
1061:
1060:
1059:
1057:
1056:
1055:
1054:
1048:deletion review
1034:
1006:
1004:
997:
957:
939:
937:
900:Transit Toronto
876:Transit Toronto
757:
734:
732:
721:
715:
709:
691:
689:
530:
320:
301:
174:
165:
130:
114:
111:
74:
71:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1064:
1062:
1053:
1052:
1019:
1014:
1003:
1002:
1001:
993:
986:oppose merging
979:
947:
936:
935:
934:
933:
932:
931:
930:
929:
928:
880:
854:
853:
827:
826:
825:
815:Nyamo Kurosawa
779:
769:Nyamo Kurosawa
742:
731:
730:
729:
702:
678:
661:
651:Nyamo Kurosawa
640:
625:
606:
587:
573:
558:
557:
556:
555:
525:
524:
502:
501:
500:
499:
454:
453:
452:
451:
450:
449:
448:
447:
356:
355:
331:
330:
311:
235:
234:
171:
110:
109:
104:
94:
89:
72:
70:
65:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1063:
1051:
1049:
1045:
1041:
1036:
1035:
1032:
1028:
1024:
1017:
1012:
1009:
1000:
996:
995:contributions
991:
987:
983:
980:
978:
974:
970:
966:
962:
959:
958:
955:
952:
945:
942:
927:
924:
921:
917:
913:
909:
905:
901:
898:
897:
896:
893:
892:
888:
887:
881:
877:
873:
872:
871:
867:
863:
862:Pi.1415926535
858:
857:
856:
855:
852:
848:
844:
840:
835:
831:
828:
824:
820:
816:
812:
808:
804:
800:
796:
795:
794:
791:
788:
783:
780:
778:
774:
770:
766:
762:
759:
758:
755:
751:
747:
740:
737:
728:
724:
718:
712:
706:
703:
701:
696:
694:
686:
682:
679:
677:
673:
669:
665:
662:
660:
656:
652:
648:
644:
638:
634:
630:
623:
619:
615:
611:
604:
600:
596:
592:
585:
581:
577:
571:
567:
563:
560:
559:
554:
551:
550:
546:
545:
540:
534:
529:
528:
527:
526:
523:
520:
517:
513:
512:
507:
504:
503:
498:
495:
494:
490:
489:
484:
481:
478:
476:
473:
472:
471:
467:
463:
462:Pi.1415926535
459:
456:
455:
446:
443:
440:
436:
432:
428:
424:
422:
418:
416:
412:
410:
406:
404:
400:
396:
392:
391:
390:
387:
386:
382:
381:
372:
371:
370:
367:
364:
360:
359:
358:
357:
354:
351:
350:
346:
345:
340:
336:
333:
332:
328:
325:
323:
317:
312:
309:
306:
304:
298:
293:
292:
291:
290:
287:
284:
280:
275:
274:
271:
268:
264:
263:extensive use
260:
255:
253:
249:
245:
242:
241:
230:
226:
223:
220:
216:
212:
208:
205:
202:
199:
196:
193:
190:
187:
184:
180:
177:
176:Find sources:
172:
168:
164:
161:
155:
151:
147:
143:
138:
134:
129:
125:
121:
117:
113:
112:
108:
105:
102:
98:
95:
93:
90:
88:
85:
84:
83:
81:
76:
69:
66:
64:
63:
59:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
1039:
1037:
1015:
1005:
990:Patar knight
985:
981:
960:
938:
915:
911:
899:
890:
885:
875:
838:
829:
781:
760:
733:
704:
692:
680:
663:
565:
561:
548:
543:
539:This article
509:
505:
492:
487:
458:Merge/Delete
457:
420:
414:
408:
402:
384:
379:
348:
343:
334:
322:CAPTAIN RAJU
321:
303:CAPTAIN RAJU
302:
278:
276:
256:
251:
238:
236:
224:
218:
210:
203:
197:
191:
185:
175:
162:
73:
50:no consensus
49:
47:
31:
28:
969:Smartyllama
746:Ad Orientem
506:Weak delete
377:in gbooks.
339:book result
201:free images
843:XavierItzm
693:Sandstein
1044:talk page
902:is not a
834:WP:BEFORE
533:Mackensen
516:Mackensen
435:neologism
37:talk page
1046:or in a
1023:Kirbanzo
1008:Relisted
941:Relisted
920:RoySmith
906:. From
886:Spinning
803:this one
799:this one
787:RoySmith
736:Relisted
722:contribs
544:Spinning
488:Spinning
439:RoySmith
431:WP:UNDUE
380:Spinning
363:RoySmith
344:Spinning
283:RoySmith
267:RoySmith
160:View log
101:glossary
39:or in a
710:Mythdon
668:Rosario
562:Comment
207:WP refs
195:scholar
133:protect
128:history
78:New to
965:WP:GNG
923:(talk)
918:. --
790:(talk)
647:WP:TNT
519:(talk)
442:(talk)
437:. --
366:(talk)
286:(talk)
270:(talk)
237:Fails
179:Google
137:delete
54:Michig
904:WP:RS
891:Spark
761:Merge
705:Merge
681:Merge
549:Spark
493:Spark
433:as a
407:, or
385:Spark
349:Spark
248:WP:RS
222:JSTOR
183:books
167:Stats
154:views
146:watch
142:links
16:<
1027:talk
982:Keep
973:talk
961:Keep
866:talk
847:talk
830:Keep
819:talk
801:and
773:talk
750:talk
716:talk
672:talk
664:Keep
655:talk
466:talk
429:and
427:WP:N
399:WP:N
395:WP:V
335:Keep
244:WP:N
240:WP:V
215:FENS
189:news
150:logs
124:talk
120:edit
58:talk
992:- /
683:to
229:TWL
158:– (
1029:)
975:)
910::
868:)
849:)
821:)
775:)
752:)
725:)
719:•
674:)
657:)
635:,
631:,
620:,
616:,
612:,
601:,
597:,
593:,
582:,
578:,
485:.
468:)
318:.
299:.
209:)
152:|
148:|
144:|
140:|
135:|
131:|
126:|
122:|
60:)
52:.
1025:(
971:(
864:(
845:(
817:(
771:(
748:(
713:(
670:(
653:(
639:)
627:(
624:)
605:)
589:(
586:)
572:.
535::
531:@
464:(
233:)
225:·
219:·
211:·
204:·
198:·
192:·
186:·
181:(
173:(
170:)
163:·
156:)
118:(
103:)
99:(
56:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.