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.
Utterly useless list of 13 roads in Oslo, bizarrely ranging from highways to small-time dead-ends. A result of a merger of a dozen individual road articles, most of which are in themselves not notable, the list is essentially untouched since 2009. No potential. In case you wondered, Oslo has hundreds of roads.
Geschichte (
talk)
21:49, 14 February 2017 (UTC)reply
So, no argument, you just want to have your vote counted? Is this also a request to have a vote-counting admin to close this discussion without regard to strength of argument and applicable policy?
Unscintillating (
talk)
14:08, 18 February 2017 (UTC)reply
Wrong venue If the article contains alleged undue weight because it covers cul-de-sacs in preference to more-prominent roads, this is not an
WP:UNDUE problem that is solved with deletion, this is simply the current consensus at this article for what should be covered. This is an "editing opportunity", not a "deletion opportunity". Besides obvious arguments from WP:ATA such as
"no one is working on it" and
"it is useless"; the dig on
WP:ATD that the article is the result of a merge is not supported by
WP:Deletion policy, as merge is accepted as part of deletion policy for non-notable topics. The nomination fascinatingly contradicts itself when it first of all says that there is no article potential and then stipulates that there are hundreds of roads in Oslo.
Unscintillating (
talk)
14:08, 18 February 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep. There may be editing issues. Major roads in any major city can be covered in an article, though, as there exists coverage about them of course. Having a list-article is a good thing, too, enabling us to redirect smaller articles about individual roads to the list-article. --
doncram14:51, 18 February 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete, and then let Sam Sailor create a new article as he suggests. There is no reason to preserve this history of this article by blanking it and maintaining the title. --
MelanieN (
talk)
01:14, 1 March 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete. Random
WP:MILL roads, no indication why these in particular need coverage. If anybody wants to translate the Norwegian article, they can do so from scratch after deletion. Sandstein 18:52, 9 March 2017 (UTC)reply
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.
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.
Utterly useless list of 13 roads in Oslo, bizarrely ranging from highways to small-time dead-ends. A result of a merger of a dozen individual road articles, most of which are in themselves not notable, the list is essentially untouched since 2009. No potential. In case you wondered, Oslo has hundreds of roads.
Geschichte (
talk)
21:49, 14 February 2017 (UTC)reply
So, no argument, you just want to have your vote counted? Is this also a request to have a vote-counting admin to close this discussion without regard to strength of argument and applicable policy?
Unscintillating (
talk)
14:08, 18 February 2017 (UTC)reply
Wrong venue If the article contains alleged undue weight because it covers cul-de-sacs in preference to more-prominent roads, this is not an
WP:UNDUE problem that is solved with deletion, this is simply the current consensus at this article for what should be covered. This is an "editing opportunity", not a "deletion opportunity". Besides obvious arguments from WP:ATA such as
"no one is working on it" and
"it is useless"; the dig on
WP:ATD that the article is the result of a merge is not supported by
WP:Deletion policy, as merge is accepted as part of deletion policy for non-notable topics. The nomination fascinatingly contradicts itself when it first of all says that there is no article potential and then stipulates that there are hundreds of roads in Oslo.
Unscintillating (
talk)
14:08, 18 February 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep. There may be editing issues. Major roads in any major city can be covered in an article, though, as there exists coverage about them of course. Having a list-article is a good thing, too, enabling us to redirect smaller articles about individual roads to the list-article. --
doncram14:51, 18 February 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete, and then let Sam Sailor create a new article as he suggests. There is no reason to preserve this history of this article by blanking it and maintaining the title. --
MelanieN (
talk)
01:14, 1 March 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete. Random
WP:MILL roads, no indication why these in particular need coverage. If anybody wants to translate the Norwegian article, they can do so from scratch after deletion. Sandstein 18:52, 9 March 2017 (UTC)reply
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.