![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on September 2005. The result of the discussion was keep. |
![]() | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I have a serious problem with the 'historically the most significant road in Raleigh, North Carolina' claim. Given that the road didn't exist by name until the '80s, and no part of the road whatsoever existed before 1948, I have a hard time accepting the assertion that it's historically anything. -- Booklegger 02:46, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Just a few words about why this article was created: my intent was primarily to begin an article about a major road (in the Raleigh area) that I am interested in and believe may have an interesting (and possibly instrumental -- to Raleigh) history. I just supplied all the information that I could think of in a short time, and hope that someday someone knowledgable about the area could add a little more. Perhaps the title should be changed (article moved) to reflect the Raleigh relationship, but I hope that the article can remain in some form (as space permits) until some of the area's history can be added. -- Rockhprpenguin 03:12, Jun 15, 2004 (UTC)
From VfD:
True orphan--doesn't even link from the related Interstate article the original contributor has worked on. I don't want to "bite the newcomer", but seriously, do we want tens of thousand of street name articles? I realize "WP is not paper", but I go back to my 'ratio of articles/Wikipedians argument', an addition of which would be that all the time spent by new WPers on 'killing street name red-links', would be better spent on articles with more broad interest. Niteowlneils 06:10, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC)
end moved dicussion
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Capital Boulevard's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "google":
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 16:14, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on September 2005. The result of the discussion was keep. |
![]() | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I have a serious problem with the 'historically the most significant road in Raleigh, North Carolina' claim. Given that the road didn't exist by name until the '80s, and no part of the road whatsoever existed before 1948, I have a hard time accepting the assertion that it's historically anything. -- Booklegger 02:46, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Just a few words about why this article was created: my intent was primarily to begin an article about a major road (in the Raleigh area) that I am interested in and believe may have an interesting (and possibly instrumental -- to Raleigh) history. I just supplied all the information that I could think of in a short time, and hope that someday someone knowledgable about the area could add a little more. Perhaps the title should be changed (article moved) to reflect the Raleigh relationship, but I hope that the article can remain in some form (as space permits) until some of the area's history can be added. -- Rockhprpenguin 03:12, Jun 15, 2004 (UTC)
From VfD:
True orphan--doesn't even link from the related Interstate article the original contributor has worked on. I don't want to "bite the newcomer", but seriously, do we want tens of thousand of street name articles? I realize "WP is not paper", but I go back to my 'ratio of articles/Wikipedians argument', an addition of which would be that all the time spent by new WPers on 'killing street name red-links', would be better spent on articles with more broad interest. Niteowlneils 06:10, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC)
end moved dicussion
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Capital Boulevard's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "google":
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 16:14, 4 June 2021 (UTC)