Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hawaii State Highway 7241

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 of the debate was No consensus --lightdarkness (talk) 17:49, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hawaii State Highway 7241

Very short article that fails the google test. Searching for it on Google brings up its article on Wikipedia as the only relevant match. I'm thinking of upgrading this to proposed deletion or perhaps speedy if necessary.--NicAgent 01:48, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete unremarkable route designation that no longer exists, only direct Ghit reference is this page. SM247My Talk 02:44, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete as it seems absolutely no trace of this designation exists -- did it ever exist? Also, nominating for AfD means, apparently, that it can never be put on PROD ever. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:56, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment - just because an article has an AfD doesn't HAVE to mean that PROD is out of the question. An AfD is to DECIDE over whether or not it should be deleted, and many a time it gets kept - these articles are only being CONSIDERED for deletion. Well for this article, it's looking on the side of deletion. I've also removed many of the empty links of four-digit Hawaiian highways from {{Hawaii State Highways}} --NicAgent 03:05, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom; unverifiable. It doesn't meet any of the criteria for Speedy though. You could whack a prod on it, but that won't neccessarily be resolved much quicker than AfD. Paddles TC 03:11, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, fails WP:V. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 05:44, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Speedy Delete Zero Google hits (other than Wikipedia article itself). Brian 11:57, 2 July 2006 (UTC)btball
  • Speedy Delete Fails Google test. -- Alias Flood 16:17, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete as unverifiable. --Tachyon01 17:59, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Delete Firstly the lack of verified information on this Highway is a concern. Secondly, it fails the Google test considerably. --Siva1979Talk to me 18:36, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
  • What the hell? When did "it doesn't google" turn into a CSD? delete slowly unless verified. Kotepho 04:31, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
  • I turned it into a CSD because as you can see above people are voting "Speedy Delete". If a sufficient number of votes on an AfD discussion call for this, the article in question can be upgraded to a speedy deletion. --NicAgent 13:56, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
CSD stands for criteria for speedy deletion. If you look on WP:CSD, it makes no mention of "it doesn't google" or similar being a criterion for speedy deletion, nor is people "voting" to Speedy Delete a criterion. -- Northenglish (talk) -- 19:51, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
Vote struck per SPUI and Gimmetrow. Kotepho 06:00, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment Keep The fact that the number begins with a 7, and the other landmarks mentioned, place this on Oahu. It does exist. It is listed here, but as far as I can tell, its only claim to notability is that it was built up to route traffic around Aloha Stadium. Not much to expand it past the stub and was probably created as a vanity article by someone who lives on Halawa Heights. This is likely deletable as NN but I strongly oppose speedily. Gimmetrow 02:37, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
  • If there is a precedent for state highways, this should be a keep. Gimmetrow 15:31, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
  • There have been ample precedents that state-numbered highways are "notable". Thus the issue here is verifiability. It is listed on [1]. Unfortunately, Hawaii DOT does not seem to have any maps online. However, my 1993 AAA road atlas shows this route. That should at least minimally satisfy verifiability, and further sources can be gotten from DOT maps (which are often distributed to local libraries). I would like to remind the closer that AFD is not a vote. --SPUI (T - C) 05:49, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment Yeah - I can believe you on that. But given that the route no longer exists, that is really the point that has started this AfD. --NicAgent 14:43, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
  • I've seen no evidence provided that it "no longer exists" - quite the contrary in the link provided by me (and spui). Gimmetrow 15:31, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. Per precedent, state highways are inherently notable and are kept, and as SPUI mentioned above, this one is verifiable. Also, even if it has been decommissioned, that doesn't necessarily make it no longer notable – see the arguments presented at this AfD. –Pedriana 15:22, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Objection User:SPUI is somewhat of a vandal account and therefore his sayings may not be reliable. And considering how this route has not existed for as long as 13 years shows that not many would be interested in reading such content. --NicAgent 16:29, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Objection to the objection. "Vandal account"? I highly suggest you actually look at his contributions before making such an accusation. WP:NPA. –Pedriana 19:03, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Addendum – Just to clarify so that you don't think I'm just blindly supporting him, yes, I recognize he has made plenty of controversial edits, but the vast majority of these have (at least initally) been made in what I see as good faith and very few are out-and-out vandalism as you imply. My point is, there is really quite little (if any) evidence that his sayings are "unreliable". –Pedriana 19:25, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Again, what verifiable evidence does the nom have for his assertion that the road no longer exists? Given that his extensive google searching failed to find any information (and missed the source I provided before SPUI), I would question how he now has this information. Furthermore, contrary to the assertion of nom's reversion of {{Hawaii State Highways}}, 4-digit HI route codes do exist. I was even considering expanding that template to include a few others. Gimmetrow 21:05, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Some are even signed: 7101 7310 --SPUI (T - C) 10:30, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep per SPUI, Gimmetrow, and Pedriana. User:SPUI is controversial, but far from a vandal account. -- Northenglish (talk) -- 20:08, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Per precedent, numbered state highways are notable. Verifiability has also been noted by several people above. --Polaron | Talk 23:08, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep precedent for keeping state highways and has been properly sourced. Eluchil404 22:09, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
  • SHOCKER! The nomiator has been indefinitely blocked from editing, apparently in response to him playing Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde on Wikipedia - using his main account to contribute positively, and doing pure vandalism on many, many sockpuppet accounts. In this case, the vote here could be a Speedy Keep. --64.251.53.130 23:16, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
That's not a reason to speedy keep - but it will clearly be kept. --SPUI (T - C) 07:16, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
Lol, like the "SHOCKER!" heading. Certainly puts his objection to SPUI above in a different light. -- Northenglish (talk) -- 20:36, 7 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.