Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/M43 (Durban): Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
result
 
(19 intermediate revisions by 11 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
<noinclude>{{Delrevxfd|date=2023 October 18|result=endorse}}</noinclude><div class="boilerplate afd vfd xfd-closed archived mw-archivedtalk" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
===[[:M43 (Durban)]]===
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's [[Help:Using talk pages|talk page]] or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.''
{{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|P}}
<!--Template:Afd top


Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links to create a new discussion page using the name format of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGENAME (2nd nomination)]]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->

The result was '''delete'''‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. This is unsourced and sources arguably do not exist. I don't see how we can maintain an article that is not OR in these circumstances. On that basis I would accept the argument that V takes precedence over the SNG.

We have been here many times before and when faced with a core policy indicating deletion against an SNG supporting inclusion the answer is always to revisit the the SNG. On that basis the policy based argument is that this is an unsourced article that cannot be sourced. [[User:Spartaz|Spartaz]] <sup>''[[User talk:Spartaz|Humbug!]]''</sup> 05:39, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
===[[:M43 (Durban)]]===
<noinclude>{{AFD help}}</noinclude>
<noinclude>{{AFD help}}</noinclude>
:{{la|1=M43 (Durban)}} – (<includeonly>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/M43 (Durban)|View AfD]]</includeonly><noinclude>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2023 October 2#{{anchorencode:M43 (Durban)}}|View log]]</noinclude> | [[Special:Diff/1177474561/cur|edits since nomination]])
:{{la|1=M43 (Durban)}} – (<includeonly>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/M43 (Durban)|View AfD]]</includeonly><noinclude>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2023 October 9#{{anchorencode:M43 (Durban)}}|View log]]</noinclude> | [[Special:Diff/1177474561/cur|edits since nomination]])
:({{Find sources AFD|title=M43 (Durban)}})
:({{Find sources AFD|title=M43 (Durban)}})
Fails [[WP:GNG]]. [[WP:GEOROAD]] states "topic notability for county roads... are presumed to be notable if they have been the subject of multiple published secondary sources which contain significant coverage and are reliable and independent of the subject" which there is no evidence of. '''–––''' [[User:GMH Melbourne|<span style="color:black">GMH MELBOURNE</span>]] [[User talk:GMH Melbourne|<span style="font-size:85%;">TALK</span>]] 09:26, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
Fails [[WP:GNG]]. [[WP:GEOROAD]] states "topic notability for county roads... are presumed to be notable if they have been the subject of multiple published secondary sources which contain significant coverage and are reliable and independent of the subject" which there is no evidence of. '''–––''' [[User:GMH Melbourne|<span style="color:black">GMH MELBOURNE</span>]] [[User talk:GMH Melbourne|<span style="font-size:85%;">TALK</span>]] 09:26, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
Line 9: Line 16:
*<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This discussion has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Transportation|list of Transportation-related deletion discussions]]. [[User:Spiderone|<span style="color: #996600">Spiderone</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Spiderone|<span style="color:brown">(Talk to Spider)</span>]]</sup> 11:17, 2 October 2023 (UTC)</small>
*<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This discussion has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Transportation|list of Transportation-related deletion discussions]]. [[User:Spiderone|<span style="color: #996600">Spiderone</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Spiderone|<span style="color:brown">(Talk to Spider)</span>]]</sup> 11:17, 2 October 2023 (UTC)</small>
*'''Speedy keep''' because this isn't even a county road. [[WP:GEOROAD]] clearly says "national, state and provincial highways are typically notable." So this is a flawed nomination. '''''[[User:LilianaUwU|<span style="font-family:default;color:#246BCE;">Liliana</span><span style="font-family:Comic Sans MS;color:#FF1493;">UwU</span>]]''''' <sup>([[User talk:LilianaUwU|talk]] / [[Special:Contributions/LilianaUwU|contributions]])</sup> 12:43, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
*'''Speedy keep''' because this isn't even a county road. [[WP:GEOROAD]] clearly says "national, state and provincial highways are typically notable." So this is a flawed nomination. '''''[[User:LilianaUwU|<span style="font-family:default;color:#246BCE;">Liliana</span><span style="font-family:Comic Sans MS;color:#FF1493;">UwU</span>]]''''' <sup>([[User talk:LilianaUwU|talk]] / [[Special:Contributions/LilianaUwU|contributions]])</sup> 12:43, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' - Per LilianaUwU, this is not a county road and does meet the notability criteria for GEOROAD. The metropolitan routes in South Africa are more similar to state/provincial routes in other countries. '''<span style="background:#006B54; padding:2px">[[User:Dough4872|<span style="color:white">Dough</span>]]</span><span style="background: #FFD200; padding:2px">[[User talk:Dough4872|<span style="color:black">4872</span>]]</span>''' 13:08, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
*:It says it's maintained by [[eThekwini Metropolitan Municipality]]. Wouldn't that be a county? '''–––''' [[User:GMH Melbourne|<span style="color:black">GMH MELBOURNE</span>]] [[User talk:GMH Melbourne|<span style="font-size:85%;">TALK</span>]] 14:04, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
*::Routes like [[NY 895]] are maintained by New York City, but that doesn't make them any less of a state highway, no? '''''[[User:LilianaUwU|<span style="font-family:default;color:#246BCE;">Liliana</span><span style="font-family:Comic Sans MS;color:#FF1493;">UwU</span>]]''''' <sup>([[User talk:LilianaUwU|talk]] / [[Special:Contributions/LilianaUwU|contributions]])</sup> 14:57, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
*:::Yes but they have sources that meet [[WP:GNG]] to make them notable. '''–––''' [[User:GMH Melbourne|<span style="color:black">GMH MELBOURNE</span>]] [[User talk:GMH Melbourne|<span style="font-size:85%;">TALK</span>]] 00:04, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
*::::Per [[WP:N]], actual policy, an article only needs to meet GNG or an SNG. GEOROAD is the SNG here. If the other editors here say that this topic meeds GEOROAD, then it doesn't matter if it does or doesn't meet GNG, ''per policy'', a fact that many editors seem to have forgotten. <span style="background:#006B54; padding:2px;">'''[[User:Imzadi1979|<span style="color:white;">Imzadi&nbsp;1979</span>]]&nbsp;[[User talk:Imzadi1979|<span style="color:white;"><big>→</big></span>]]'''</span> 03:59, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
*:::::Well the SNG says "county roads... are presumed to be notable if they have been the subject of multiple published secondary sources which contain significant coverage and are reliable and independent of the subject" which this article does not have. '''–––''' [[User:GMH Melbourne|<span style="color:black">GMH MELBOURNE</span>]] [[User talk:GMH Melbourne|<span style="font-size:85%;">TALK</span>]] 04:08, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
*:::::[[WP:N]] isn't a policy, it's a guideline. See the box at the top of the page cf: "{{xt|This page documents an English Wikipedia notability guideline}}". That's why GMHM and my comments are about policies. [[User:Ritchie333|<b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b>]] [[User talk:Ritchie333|<sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk)</sup>]] [[Special:Contributions/Ritchie333|<sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)</sup>]] 15:47, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. Meets [[WP:GEOROAD]] as above. -- [[User:Necrothesp|Necrothesp]] ([[User talk:Necrothesp|talk]]) 10:20, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - The only source is one saying it was renamed, and I can't find any other sources, also not a suitable redirect term. To those advocating [[WP:GEOROAD]], remember that is a '''guideline''' while [[WP:V]] and [[WP:DP]] are '''policies'''. If this was notable, I'd create [[No Name Street, Sandwich]] as it has as much coverage in reliable sources as this street. ([https://www.kentonline.co.uk/sandwich/news/town-in-a-pickle-as-ham-sandwich-sign-sparks-trip-hazard-c-293800/]) [[User:Ritchie333|<b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b>]] [[User talk:Ritchie333|<sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk)</sup>]] [[Special:Contributions/Ritchie333|<sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)</sup>]] 11:52, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
:<p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"><span style="color: #FF6600;">'''{{resize|91%|[[Wikipedia:Deletion process#Relisting discussions|Relisted]] to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}'''</span><br /><small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, <small>[[User:CycloneYoris|<b style="color:blue; text-shadow:cyan 0.0em 0.0em 0.1em;">CycloneYoris</b>]]</small> <sup>[[User talk:CycloneYoris|<b style="color:purple">''talk!''</b>]]</sup> 23:00, 9 October 2023 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:XfD relist --></p>
*'''Delete''' This seems like one that needs a long explanation. {{ping|Ritchie333}}'s rationale seems to be solid. The [[WP:GEOROAD]] automatic notability covers {{tq|Road networks: International road networks (such as the International E-road network), Interstate, national, state and provincial highways}} - but this does not appear to one of those: our article describes it as a {{tq|a short metropolitan route}} and [[Metropolitan Routes in Durban]] describes it as {{tq|intra-city}}. In this case it appears our guide allows this article to be kept if there is {{tq|multiple published secondary sources which contain significant coverage and are reliable and independent of the subject.}}. My [[WP:BEFORE]] has shown me that there is none to be found Even Google maps does not seem to recognize the road as significant. Ping me if anyone can come up with RS and I will change my ivote. [[User:Lightburst|Lightburst]] ([[User talk:Lightburst|talk]]) 15:17, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
::'''Comment''' Metropolitan route networks predate the current municipal framework in South Africa, and were designed as intercity route networks. The fact that the municipal boundaries were expanded doesn’t change this fact (and in the cases of Johannesburg and Ekurhuleni they still do cross modern municipal boundaries). So they are not, strictly “intra-city” as these municipalities are enornmous and polycentric made up of separate cities and towns (I vaguely recall that the there was a political idea mooted to abolish provinces and replace them with municipalities which are a more valid second-tier government structure). So these routes are provincial in nature. [[User:Park3r|Park3r]] ([[User talk:Park3r|talk]]) 23:58, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

*'''Keep''' - Flawed nomination, I see nothing wrong with the article. Just needs to be expanded a little bit with more references. Plus, there's plenty of articles on Wikipedia, similar to this article, that look like this. [[User:Geko72290|Geko72290]] ([[User talk:Geko72290|talk]]) 21:51, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
*:But how is it meet wikipedias notability standards?
*:{{tqq|Just needs to be expanded a little bit with more reference}} - References don't exist, if you find any, perhaps add them.
*:{{tqq|there's plenty of articles on Wikipedia, similar to this article}} - see [[WP:OTHERSTUFF]]. '''––– [[User:GMH Melbourne|<span style="color:black">GMH MELBOURNE</span>]]''' 22:59, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
:::Your rationale is tough {{ping|Geko72290}} because you have said {{tq|Just needs to be expanded a little bit with more references.}}. But there are none to be found, if they [[WP:NEXIST]] the participants here, and myself, are unable to find them. Most of the other keeps here come from the belief that this intra-city route has automatic notability based on our guideline, but I believe that it does not. From your rationale you believe it can be expanded with sources, but it cannot because they do not exist. [[User:Lightburst|Lightburst]] ([[User talk:Lightburst|talk]]) 00:40, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
{{clear}}
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's [[Help:Using talk pages|talk page]] or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.''<!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>

Latest revision as of 03:44, 7 December 2023

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.

The result was delete‎. This is unsourced and sources arguably do not exist. I don't see how we can maintain an article that is not OR in these circumstances. On that basis I would accept the argument that V takes precedence over the SNG.

We have been here many times before and when faced with a core policy indicating deletion against an SNG supporting inclusion the answer is always to revisit the the SNG. On that basis the policy based argument is that this is an unsourced article that cannot be sourced. Spartaz Humbug! 05:39, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

M43 (Durban) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. WP:GEOROAD states "topic notability for county roads... are presumed to be notable if they have been the subject of multiple published secondary sources which contain significant coverage and are reliable and independent of the subject" which there is no evidence of. ––– GMH MELBOURNE TALK 09:26, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 23:00, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete This seems like one that needs a long explanation. @Ritchie333:'s rationale seems to be solid. The WP:GEOROAD automatic notability covers Road networks: International road networks (such as the International E-road network), Interstate, national, state and provincial highways - but this does not appear to one of those: our article describes it as a a short metropolitan route and Metropolitan Routes in Durban describes it as intra-city. In this case it appears our guide allows this article to be kept if there is multiple published secondary sources which contain significant coverage and are reliable and independent of the subject.. My WP:BEFORE has shown me that there is none to be found Even Google maps does not seem to recognize the road as significant. Ping me if anyone can come up with RS and I will change my ivote. Lightburst (talk) 15:17, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Metropolitan route networks predate the current municipal framework in South Africa, and were designed as intercity route networks. The fact that the municipal boundaries were expanded doesn’t change this fact (and in the cases of Johannesburg and Ekurhuleni they still do cross modern municipal boundaries). So they are not, strictly “intra-city” as these municipalities are enornmous and polycentric made up of separate cities and towns (I vaguely recall that the there was a political idea mooted to abolish provinces and replace them with municipalities which are a more valid second-tier government structure). So these routes are provincial in nature. Park3r (talk) 23:58, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Flawed nomination, I see nothing wrong with the article. Just needs to be expanded a little bit with more references. Plus, there's plenty of articles on Wikipedia, similar to this article, that look like this. Geko72290 (talk) 21:51, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    But how is it meet wikipedias notability standards?
    Just needs to be expanded a little bit with more reference - References don't exist, if you find any, perhaps add them.
    there's plenty of articles on Wikipedia, similar to this article - see WP:OTHERSTUFF. ––– GMH MELBOURNE 22:59, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Your rationale is tough @Geko72290: because you have said Just needs to be expanded a little bit with more references.. But there are none to be found, if they WP:NEXIST the participants here, and myself, are unable to find them. Most of the other keeps here come from the belief that this intra-city route has automatic notability based on our guideline, but I believe that it does not. From your rationale you believe it can be expanded with sources, but it cannot because they do not exist. Lightburst (talk) 00:40, 18 October 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.