Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Rodovia

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 of the debate was - kept

[edit] Rodovia

This article is completely pointless. The main reason, which should be enough to delete it, is that it was copied word by word from this article. It was created by a newbie, who apparently is unfamiliar with Wikipedia policy and rules. He named the article in Portuguese, as he has done with many articles he has created (see his user page). Delete. Redux 03:07, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• Lost/orphaned nom--tagged over an hour ago, but not on main VfD page. No vote. Niteowlneils 04:38, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. Rodovia appears simply to mean highway in Portuguese. --Dbenbenn 05:15, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Delete &#0xfeff; --fvw* 08:23, 2004 Dec 20 (UTC)
• Delete: DCEdwards1966 20:38, Dec 20, 2004 (UTC)
• Delete, let's just say as too-granular roadcruft. Wyss 00:20, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. utcursch 08:07, Dec 21, 2004 (UTC)
• Keep ApS Camper 05:19, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Keep I hadn't realized there was an article Autobahn about "the German word for a major high-speed road". ApS Camper, will you be able to make Rodovia as encyclopedic as Autobahn is? Dbenbenn 05:40, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. "roadcruft", for crying out loud? This is an article presenting a great deal of detailed information about the highway system of Brazil, if that's not encyclopedic then what's the US interstate highway system doing in Wikipedia? Bryan 21:02, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Keep Since the page has improved a lot since the page was created, with now a good standard of Wikipedia quality and capacity to be improved even more, why delete? It gives detailed information about the Brazilian highway system, as the US interstate, Autobahn or Autoroute pages does Zigzagoon 02:05, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I reorganized the page's structure, and added information. I don't see a mistake in simply naming the page with a foreign word, as many in Wikipedia are named too (see Autoroute, Autobahn, for example, in highway article). Artists, bands, cities and companies and (sometimes) regions names should use the original name (although you can and should translate its meaning in the article, when possible and appliable). When I couldn't find a apropriate name, I made sure to make lots of redirects to that page or links connecting to it. Redux argued And is that it was copied word by word from this article, but it was me that in fact added that information there (but I copied after to the "Rodovia" article, it was my mistake, but I reestructured everything). Please, take a quick look before anyone delete it; at most, I suggest moving the page to "Brazilian Highway System", merge with "List of Brazilian Highways or anything like that. Sometimes I rush to complete things and I don't see my errors, but it is in the errors that we learn. Please give the article a second chance. ApS Camper 05:19, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Dbenbenn mentioned the Autobahn article. However, the "Autobahn" is much more than simply the German word for "highway", specialists tend to view it as a type of road apart from others, that is, an Autobahn is a road, but it is more (or different, to a certain extent) than a highway. That is what makes it possible for there to be a separate article on it, and as encyclopedic as it is. That is not the same with the Brazilian Highways. Those are just... highways, and as such I still believe that any reference to them would be better off as a part of the larger Highway article. Even with the changes that ApS Camper has made to the article. It's not about getting rid of the information, but rather moving it to a more suitable place (I believe). Concerning the naming of articles in foreign languages, theoretically it's only acceptable in the cases of proper names (people mainly, but also bands, geographical locations if a denomination in English does not exist or objects and idiomatic expressions that are used in their foreign form in the English-speaking world – e.g.:faux pas or the aforementioned Autobahn), otherwise, non-English forms should exist only as redirects to the article. I believe that is uncontroversial – what's still being discussed is only what to do when discrepancies exist between English dialects (British, Canadian, U.S., Australian. etc.) or in terms of naming conventions in different countries. This is the English Wikipedia after all. As for the Rodovia article, I still maintain that it be deleted (but the data be moved to the Highway article). I am of course open to the possibility of keeping it if ApS Camper or someone else can somehow make it encyclopedic enough. I do not believe that this has been achieved as yet. Redux 19:53, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I don't know whether an Autobahn is "a type of road apart from others", but the article Autobahn doesn't imply that as far as I can see. In fact, that article specifically says that Autobahnen are "similar to such freeways in other countries". As far as I can tell, the content of Autobahn is simply "highways in Germany (and Austria and Switzerland)", and the only reason it has its own article is that the information wouldn't fit comfortably at highway. Dbenbenn 03:47, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• Thinking carefully, Redux is not entirely correct, but not entirely wrong neither. What had happened is the following: I was putting in information about Brazilian highways in the highway page, and suddenly I thought of making a new page with information about the Brazilian highways (which are named "rodovia"). While in the moment I had done a mistake in pasting the information given at highway page in the rodovia page, I, like Redux asked for, completely reorganized the page.

Still, as now the page has more information about Brazilian Highway System than the properly said "rodovias" (or if you prefer, Portuguese term given to Brazilian highways), I think that it can be prudent to move the page to, let me say, "Brazilian Highway System", and use the old page as redirect. But Brazilian highways have its similarities and differences from other highways in other countries, as Autobahns, Autoroutes, etc, etc; have (and observe that even in the Authobahn page, is written in italics, something like "this article is about the German road system" - the pages gives explanation in both the autobahns system and the autobahns themselves)

As I said, Redux's afirmation that Brazilian highways are not different than any other in the world is correct, but neither Autobahns are (as was said by Dbenbenn, and I add a comment of mine - many modern "rodovias" are like Autobahns, with the difference that the latter has no speed limit). And while he is still somewhat correct about the need of some major reorganization and more information, not all pages in Wikipedia are born 100% complete and correct. I am not the Greek God of Knowledge, neither Redux, nor anyone else (and that is the best thing of Wikipedia: everyone helps to build the pyramid (of knowledge). Give us time (not much, as I am working currently on it - unfortunately for me, I don't type very quickly), and sure, I, or someone else, will improve the page more than enough to satisfy Wikipedia's specifications. Said and Written by ApS Camper 04:35, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I guess we are discussing too much the German Autobahn here, but fine. I am somewhat familiar with the Autobahn, and I reflected in my comment above what specialists say about it. The word "Autobahn" is indeed German for "highway", but as it exists in Germany, it has become a noun apart. If the article doesn't say that, I'd say it's inaccurate or incomplete (you said it ApS Camper, many articles are less than perfect on Wikipedia). But in any case, if we were to reach a consensus that the Autobahn is indeed just the German word for "highway", then I'd advocate that the contents of that article be merged in the Highway article and that article be deleted. My point is (and has been all along): there's no reason to scatter the information in countless separate articles (imagine if people start creating articles to describe the road system of every country...). In conclusion, if the Autobahn article is good or not, if it's accurate or not, that's a different discussion, especially because two wrongs don't make a right. I'm sorry, but I still defend the delete option. Redux 14:54, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• I had seen recently the page Wikipedia:Deletion policy, and I saw that the page, by the criteria given in the page above, does not necessarialy need deletion. By what Redux's arguments tell, the page is "written in a foreign language" *but only some words are in fact written in portuguese, the "rodovia" itself"). By Redux's arguments, it is a minor branch of a subject that it doesn't deserve an article. But I also disagree, because the page is giving information about the Brazilian road system (and not just describing it). Even if he is right at this point and I wrong, the correct procedure will be merge the page into a more useful content, by wikipedia's policies. Yes, the article needs improvement (cleanup), but I am working currently on it. Yes, I know that I could just put all this information in the highway page, but there is lots of information that is not relationated with the highway itself, but with the entire system. And I don't see why not create a page about the Brazilian road system, even because Brazil is a country that depends heavily on its road system, and that because many did with other countries's road systems. But perhaps I am really creating too much pages about the Brazilian highways. In this case, merge the content given in List of Brazilian Highways and its subpages with the content given in "rodovia" page, will make be the best option, in my opinion (like the Autoroute page, Quebec's road system).

In any case, be the page deleted, moved, merged or kept, I am determined to make a good and interesting page about it. Please, if possible, when you, the admin, in case you take the decision to delete the page, give me explanation about the page's mistakes, (feel free to comment in my user's page) to see what I had done wrong, and avoid hassling mistakes again. ApS Camper 19:06, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I'll say it again: although I'm advocating that the article be deleted, I've said time and again that the information in it should be merged in the highway article. I never suggested that we obliterate your work. Furthermore, about the foreign language thing, I never said that the page was written in a foreign language, I said it was named in it (the article's name is Rodovia, isn't it?). But if you can make it into an article on its own, great, I'll remove the VfD tag myself, but it's not about how many words or "data" you can stuff in it, it's how encyclopedic the article can be (and since a "Brazilian Highway" is not a category of road on its own, I don't believe that'll be possible). If we come up with some other specific article, with a theme encyclopedic enough, in which we can merge the contents of the present Rodovia article, that's just as well, but once that article is created and the information in the Rodovia article is copied there, the Rodovia article itself will still need to be deleted. Finally, an Admin does not "take a decision" to erase the page. The Admins only enforce a decision made by the community, which means that an Admin will delete (or not) the article depending on the consensus that will be reached in this discussion. And maybe I misunderstood what you meant in your last paragraph, but you do know that if the article is deleted by consensus and you just re-open it, that's breach of policy, don't you? Redux 20:20, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Redux, perhaps you'd be happy if the page were moved to Highways in Brazil? I believe that would be an unimpeachable title for the article. And it wouldn't require the deletion of anything. I think the theme of Highways in Brazil is encyclopedic, as it is a non-trivial part of the history and culture of Brazil. Compare to Interstate Highway about American highways. Dbenbenn 21:57, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• So you misundestood me, Redux. I said that I pretend to make a good page about it (the Brazilian highway system, rodovia, etc), no just reopen it. I will wait to take apropriate action, that is what I meant. Your suggestion of merging information in the highway article is good, but then the page will be full of information that does not correspond to the article given (highway), and that is incoehrent of your part, that once said that Wikipedia's pages should have consistent information about the article given. Why you, Redux, don't see the Autoroute example, once that I am pretending to merge content given in the rodovia page to the content given in List of Brazilian Highways and subpages, and expand the new page in a apropriate way? The theme is encyclopedic, as said above by Dbenbenn, and have potential, if organized in the correct way, with the correct information.ApS Camper 23:46, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Moving the article to some other denomination (maybe Highways in Brazil, as Dbenbenn suggested) seems to be unavoidable, I guess. I disagree however, and I stress that this is my personal opinion, that an article on Brazilian Highways is (or would be) encyclopedic enough. In that regard, maybe an article on the Brazilian transportation system, with sections on Highways, Railways and naval lines would be more appropriate. I already know that Dbenbenn and ApS Camper disagree, but we haven't had other contributions to this discussion. I don't know if two against one qualifies as a consensus, but if no one else will contribute, I'll accept it as majority rule. Still, renaming the article (i.e. moving it) and improving the contents are essential. Regards, Redux 03:13, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

No, ApS Camper and I agree. I disagree with you about deleting; ApS Camper and I both want to keep the article. Dbenbenn 18:55, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• Keep but Move to "Brazillian highway system" or perhaps some other similar title (although of those already mentioned this one seems the best). Paul August ☎ 03:28, Dec 25, 2004 (UTC)

That was exactly what I had said Dbenbenn. I wrote that I already knew that you and ApS Camper both disagreed with my opinion, which I had just expressed. In fact, I guess the original point of this discussion is somewhat lost, since the article is going to be moved and the contents improved/altered (or whatever). For all practical purposes, the article "Rodovia", which I had listed for deletion, will no longer exist per se, although the contents will not have been lost, which is what I was advocating anyways. As I said before, it was not about obliterating ApS Camper's work, but rather placing the information in a better place (I had suggested originally a merge with the Highway article) -provided that said information be improved and expanded considerably, as it was not encyclopedic enough as it existed at the moment (which ApS Camper said he'd do). I guess once the article has been moved, the VfD tag will be removed. Regards, Redux 06:02, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Sorry, misunderstood you before. Moving to some English title sounds like a good idea to me. Dbenbenn 01:09, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• Once I guess that we choose to keep the page - I moved already it to Brazilian Highway System, as most wikipedians asked for, and I am currently working on it to make it better. Regardly, ApS Camper 00:47, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

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.