 | This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2021 June 26. For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review. |
- 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 the sort of AfD that is going to draw complaints regardless of how it is closed. I suspect that is why it was left open so long after the date it was meant to be closed. I am taking this on and I am giving it the attention it deserves. I see that a lot of effort has been put into the debate and I will consider those arguments carefully. Participants are reminded that this is not a vote and arguments are to be compared to relevant policies and guidelines.
First off when considering arguments based in policy I see that there is about equal support for both keep and delete. The primary source of disagreement seems to be regarding if the sources meet the standard of notability so that I where I will focus.
The relevant notability guideline seems to be WP:GEOROAD, both sides seem to agree this is the standard which reads: "Topic notability for county roads, regional roads (such as Ireland's regional roads), local roads, streets and motorway service areas may vary, and 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."
As such the standard I am employing when looking at opinions on the sources is "multiple published secondary sources which contain significant coverage and are reliable and independent of the subject.". Note that the standard has several elements:
- multiple
- secondary
- reliable
- independent of the subject
- significant in coverage
- about the subject of the article
A detailed look at the sources were made in the AfD and it was found that they we composed of directories, mere mentions, primary sources, undergraduate theses, or cover the topic of buildings or people that lived on the road rather than the road itself.
A small amount of coverage by reliable sources independent of the subject about the subject a itself was found but it falls far short of significant coverage.
The shear number of sources that are not secondary sources which contain significant coverage and are reliable and independent of the subject about the road itself does not add up to significant coverage by secondary sources which contain significant coverage and are reliable and independent of the subject about the subject itself.
As such the result of this AfD is Delete due to failing notability requirements. As always my talk page is open but it is not for rehashing the arguments in this AfD, but rather for discussing the closure itself. I fully expect about half of the participants to be unhappy about this outcome but that was going to happen no matter how I closed this. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 23:01, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
- Overturned to No Consensus per Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2021 June 26 -- RoySmith (talk) 13:22, 7 July 2021 (UTC)