Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/B5405 road/2005-08-07

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep (no consensus). Sjakkalle (Check!) 07:04, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] B5405 road

Minor roads are not a suitable topic for an encyclopaedia even one which is not paper. Tim Pope 11:21, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

  • Keep, roads are useful for navigation. Kappa 13:39, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete - Wikipedia is not an atlas. The B designation of the road means it's a minor single carriage road. Not notable. Unless it is a busy major road, or has historical significance, it should not be in wikipedia. - Hahnchen 14:39, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. See reasoning at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/B876 road. Flowerparty talk 14:45, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. See reasoning Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/B876 road. --Tony SidawayTalk 14:59, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. See reasoning at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/B876 road. --Calton | Talk 16:06, August 7, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, appears equivalent to a county route or small state highway in the U.S.Gateman1997 16:41, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete Wikipedia is not an atlas -- Francs2000 | Talk 17:03, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep roads designated at the national level. --SPUI (talk) 17:19, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Roadcruft. If wikiepdia is going to have a few thousand articles that, when put together, describe a map, one might rather consider uploading a map. -R. fiend 17:44, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep Completely harmless. Trying to exclude categories of articles about verifiable real things is not a productive use of time on Wikiopedia. Osomec 18:20, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Content that dilutes the intent of Wikipedia is not harmless. If multiple notable events have occurred on this road, then I'll change my mind, but as of right now its a poor substitute for Google Maps. WP:NOT an atlas. Fernando Rizo T/C 19:49, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep again, as with B876 road. — Stevey7788 (talk) 20:25, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep as per above; until and unless a wikipolicy banning such articles is created, there's simply too much precedent. 23skidoo 21:15, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete as per above.Sabine's Sunbird 00:12, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, per Fernando Rizo. Nandesuka 02:09, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep - I voted delete on a similar article recently, saying that unless therewas an intention to have articles for all B-roads, there was no point. But the more I think about it the more I realise it does little harm, is useful, and - hell, it looks like someone is writing up a lot of them. certainly more encyclopedia worthy than a lot of the cruft here. Grutness...wha? 04:02, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Just as a reality check, given the World CIA Factbook census of roads in the UK and US, assuming that the average length of a road is 10 km, this would imply that including articles for all roads in both countries would more than double the size of the wikipedia with no discernable gain. Sdedeo 05:24, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. See reasoning at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/B876 road. Proto t c 10:22, 8 August 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.