Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dover Street

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 19:27, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dover Street

An unremarkable street. Not notability of any form Nuttah68 16:11, 15 July 2006 (UTC) Also included in ths AfD

Albemarle Street
  • Delete. In its current form, there is no assertion of notability. Alphachimp talk 16:21, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment The street is the location of several notable London clubs - see entry. Jonathan Bowen 16:36, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment they do not make the street notable. Nuttah68 16:38, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment "The Arts Club, founded by Charles Dickens and others in 1863, originally in Hanover Square, is now located at 40 Dover Street." makes the article more worthwhile but it's still lacking something to make it really notable. Can you link PG Woodhouse to this art club thing?--I'll bring the food 16:48, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, many streets in London are verifiable, interesting, and historic, and I think that these meet those criteria. JYolkowski // talk 16:37, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, the street is not at all interesting from the information in the article, if it is actually interesting in itself, I expect it to be added to the article how it is in fact interesting, "The street is the location of several notable London clubs - see entry." - I also see no actual information on clubs on the street. If there is information I expect it to be added, or the street should be deleted from Wikipedia. We are not a road guide.--I'll bring the food 16:41, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Currently Delete Dover Street, and Keep Albemarle Street if the "first one-way street" bit is sourced and added to the article. Some streets are certainly notable, like New York's Wall Street and Broadway, Chicago's Maxwell_Street, or San Francisco's Lombard Street. But as written, these articles don't assert notability, and having notable things on them isn't enough in my book. I'm glad to change my mind if the articles are changed to demonstrate notability, though. William Pietri 17:47, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
    • Keep, at least for a while. I appreciate the work that Tyrenius has done, and I'm willing to let these run and see where they go. I'm still very concerned that these have crossed over into WP:NOT an indiscrimiate collection of information territory. I don't believe that a street is inherently notable just because something important once happened there or something on it is important, any more than a pair of socks is notable because somebody important did something while wearing them. To my mind the street has to be known for something like Saville Row or synonymous with something like Threadneedle Street or Downing Street. But it seems like there's enough potential for these articles to qualify. And it's also possible that my horizions are too limited; this is not a paper encyclopedia, so perhaps it's plausible that we should have 5,410 High_Street articles, each with snippets of history. William Pietri 15:22, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • I've reviewed NOT and don't see it applying to these two articles. It applies to the trivial, not items of historic interest. The point is that these are well-known and notable streets. The information in the article brings out some of the reasons why this is so, and is therefore not indiscriminate. It is purposeful. You obviously haven't noticed that we do already have 5,410 High Street articles with snippets of history. Take Oxford for example. There is High Street, Oxford. There are also all these other streets in Oxford:
I wouldn't suggest putting them up for AfD, as you'd be stirring up a hornets' nest.Tyrenius 20:10, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, I was unclear. The High Street article mentions that there are 5,410 streets called "High Street" in Britain. It seems to me that from the standard a number of people are arguing, there's no reason we wouldn't end up with articles on all of them. Personally, I don't think that important things happening in a place make the place important unless the place becomes synonymous with the events, like Chicago's Haymarket Square. Ditto having shops or galleries, unless, like Rodeo Drive, the street becomes widely known on its own. Whether these two streets qualify under the standards I'd use, I can't say, but I don't yet feel that the articles demonstrate the quality I'm looking for. As to the other articles, quite a number of them seem to be containers for trivia, and I don't believe that inclusion of articles is cause for keeping similar ones. William Pietri 23:05, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep both per the keepers above. -- RHaworth 18:18, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Both as the article's have asserted enough historical notability for me hoopydinkConas tá tú? 00:07, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment I have added significant extra material to both articles. Tyrenius 05:20, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong keep both I was absolutely astonished when I saw these two streets on AfD. They are in the heartland of London's West End off Piccadilly and both are the location for significant premises and historic events associated with the arts. I'm trying to work out how the nom managed to assess "An unremarkable street. Not notability of any form" while happily contributing to Fratton railway station, which has "a staffed ticket office, toilets, a light refreshment facility, car parking and a taxi rank"(!). Tyrenius 05:20, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment, rightly or wrongly consensus says that all stations are noteworthy, within that I will make sure articles are accurate. With streets, I have no problem with Oxford Street or Shaftsbury Avenue being included, they are synonymous with the institutions in the street as Broadway is. Dover and Abermarle Streets are not. Nuttah68 08:09, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment Within the art world, and for Albemarle Street, the scientific world too with respect to the Royal Institution, these streets are very well-known. I would suggest a little more research before an AfD in the future, or at least waiting a day or two so that the article has the chance to be developed beyond an initial stub — and at least learn to spell the names :). That said, I'm sure this has developed the articles more quickly than might have otherwise been the case! Many thanks for the excellent further development Tyrenius. — Jonathan Bowen 13:02, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment' What research? My opinion is still is that these streets, regardless of what is located in them, are not notable in themselves but merely addresses. You disagree, as is your right. I am sorry that you have seen the Afd as a personal attack and felt the need to reply in kind, it was not intended in that way. Nuttah68 15:59, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • I see no evidence of any personal attack. Jpbowen has been most polite, restrained and friendly, while making the points he wishes to. A street is what is located in it: otherwise it is just a length of tarmac. There is a contradictory logic arguing that Oxford Street is "synonymous with the institutions in the street" while Dover and Albemarle Street "regardless of what is located in them, are not notable in themselves but merely addresses". In fact, if anything, it is the other way round. I'm not aware of any institutions in Oxford Street: it is merely an address (for shops). What research? Well, the famous associations with Oscar Wilde, Lord Byron and Whistler for a start. West End streets are rather like your claim for railway stations - they are all notable. There are other intermediary stages for stubs which are often better than going directly to AfD, e.g. a {{notability}} tag, which then gives editors a chance to improve the entry. If it is subsequently not improved, then the AfD is that much stronger. If it is done, then there's no need for the AfD. I realise you've made some very good and successful noms for AfD so I don't want to knock you, but I would urge caution when there is room for doubt. Tyrenius 20:10, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • I'd agree that putting this up for AfD was hasty. As WP:DP suggests, doing a proposed deletion should be the first step. And before that, it's worth asking the author where they're going with the article. No sense in stirring up unnecessary trouble. William Pietri 23:05, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Prod is where deletion is not likely to be disputed. If the article's been started by an experienced and capable editor such as Jpbowen, then some dialogue would be the best start.Tyrenius 02:35, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment. We are going to disagree, sticking to London - Oxford Street, Harley Street, Saville Row are synonymous with the activities and institutions connected to them, Pudding Lane, Sidney Street, Cable Street are famous for events that happened in them, Whitehall and The Mall qualifies under both. Dover and Albemarle Street do not have either, they are being included because they are the address of something notable. IMO that is comparable to including someone because they are related to someone notable. Nuttah68 07:59, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
  • I think that's sophistry, or at least splitting hairs. If the street is the address of something notable, then it happened in that street. Last point is more comparable to including a street because it is joined to another street. Anyhow, let's just see how the AfD goes with new revisions. Tyrenius 08:11, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Using the same logic, and the relations analogy, then one might say that the Kennedy family is not notable because only a few of them were really important. Rather than having an article on every notable address in a street, it makes more sense to have an article on the street as a whole, especially if, like Dover Street, there is a distinct character to it. --Jumbo 09:21, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, post Tyrenius' edits. -- GWO
  • Keep. Important London street. What on earth is Dover Street doing on AfD, anyway? It's impossible to walk down any of the streets in this area without coming across multiple notable addresses, blue plaques, memorials, etc. --Jumbo 17:18, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment. Thank you for all the lively discussion. Personally I believe any significant historic street with interesting associated events and buildings, especially if there are already Wikipedia links for them from other articles, is worthy of inclusion. This means many streets in a city like London, especially in the central area. Certainly a {{notability}} tag would have been more appropriate here initially in my view in any case. But some general guidance would be welcome. Jonathan Bowen 20:52, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment. If kept, this probably should be dabbed. I suspect that there is more then one Dover Street that may be notable. Vegaswikian 23:45, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
Best to wait till it needs that. Tyrenius 00:43, 19 July 2006 (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.