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 redirect to Street or road name#Z Street. Tone 10:12, 13 February 2021 (UTC) reply

Z Street (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)

(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This page doesn't disambiguate any existing articles. Previously it was a redirect to Streets and highways of Washington, D.C., which was also inappropriate as there is no Z Street in Washington DC. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:17, 5 February 2021 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:17, 5 February 2021 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:17, 5 February 2021 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. Spiderone ^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:19, 5 February 2021 (UTC) reply

• Redirect, probably to Street or road name#Z Street, changing my "!vote" per my comments far below. -- Doncram ( talk) 20:40, 12 February 2021 (UTC) reply
• Was "Keep". This is the Zth in a series of sensible disambiguation pages, A Street (disambiguation) to Z Street (disambiguation), recently developed out by me. Deleting just one undermines the usefulness of the set, would seem picky for the sake of being picky, about the fact that there is not right at this moment a separate article about any one Z Street that I am aware of. (There may well be an article about an avenue/street also known as Z Street which I haven't yet found.) There are in fact fewer "Z Street"s than there are any other letter-named streets, I presume, because there are only so many streets needed in a sequence sometimes. Washington, D.C. for example has letters A through Z except for J, X, Y, Z. It appears to me that Sacramento, California's series runs up to "Y Street" then there is "1st Ave.", at least now in the current street configuration I can see in Google maps.
• "Z Street"s are nonetheless found in numerous cities, including:

• Dallas, Texas
• Washougal, Washington
• Vancouver, Washington
• San Diego, California
• Beale Air Force Base, California
• and many more in U.S. and elsewhere.

Having a disambiguation page allows for, indeed calls for, links to be added to articles about individual neighborhoods or about the collections of streets in a city where a given Z Street is covered.

It also allows for mentions of related topics like E Street Band and E Street (television show) which no doubt often are known as simply "E Street", etc. For Z, there is at least one Z Street Band (the one in Orlando, Florida grabbed the url of that name) which might be linked in the future.

Perhaps the Z Street Lofts (currently a redlink) in Vancouver, Washington are in fact notable and also happen to be commonly known as "Z Street".

There also exists use of term "Z Street" to mean a Zionist group (I am not linking to the usage here, I not sure if it is meant positively or if it is a pejorative label applied by others), probably relating to well-known/influential Jewish lobbying organization J Street (advocacy group) (named for the "J Street" omitted from Washington, D.C.'s layout, somewhat of a pun on K Street which often/usually refers to plethora of corporate lobbying firms traditionally located on K Street in Washington, D.C.).

There already do exist, or there will exist, notable usages of "Z Street" explicitly. It would seem obstinate or unhelpful or something like that, for Wikipedia to delete this disambiguation page in advance. See wp:TNTTNT, an essay to which I contributed, re: folly/unhelpfulness of deleting an article only for it to be recreated.

By the way, I like that the deletion nominator appreciates replacement of former redirect from "Z Street" to "Streets of Washington, D.C." which notes there is no Z Street there. A disambiguation page is more appropriate.

-- Doncram ( talk) 20:48, 5 February 2021 (UTC) reply

P.S. By the way, searching in Google News for "Z Street" brings up many usages, a few of which are:

• Lompoc, California, in Santa Maria Times article
• Level Plains, Alabama, in Southeast Sun article
• Performance of Z Street Band in this YourObserver.com article
• Wall Street Journal opinion piece re: Z Street organization known as "Z Street" ( here, behind a paywall so I can't read it). Opinion piece is titled "The IRS Campaign Against Israel—and Us: It took seven years for Z Street to learn the truth about why our tax-exempt status was delayed." And there is related article in Times of Israel noting a settlement that "includes apology from IRS to Z Street".

It is looking to me that this group is Wikipedia-notable. Must a stub article on that be created, to fend off this AFD? Although would seem like tail wagging dog. And I personally don't think that a new article about the pro-Israel group should get to grab "Z Street" wikipedia article name, on basis that I personally think there is not world-wide common usage, that persons world-wide are quite likely looking for info on a street or band or other thing near them, instead.

Just keep the dab, dabbit! -- Doncram ( talk) 20:58, 5 February 2021 (UTC) reply

• Speedy Delete - pointless disambiguation page that is eligible for deletion under WP:G14, as are many other of this series -- John B123 ( talk) 21:33, 5 February 2021 (UTC) reply

Redirect - changed !vote to redirect to Street or road name#Z Street.

• Speedy Delete per above. We don't need to disambiguate when there are no articles to disambiguate, especially since it is unlikely that such distinction will ever be needed. Mangoe ( talk) 23:51, 5 February 2021 (UTC) reply
• Doncram We actually have an entire policy page on this type of situation, at Wikipedia:Write the article first. Once you have actually written more than one article about Z Street, then we can talk about this disambiguation page. Until then, there is not reason to exist. With all that said, this qualifies for speedy delete as a page ending in (disambiguation) that only links to one article. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 08:37, 6 February 2021 (UTC) reply
• Delete. This page does not list articles that might otherwise be titled "Z Street" ( WP:DPAGE). Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 11:23, 6 February 2021 (UTC) reply
• Comment: Well, spurred by this, Draft:Z Street (organization) is in the works and should become a mainspace article soon. I personally consider it to be a marginal entity, seemingly Wikipedia-notable largely due to the IRS inappropriately denying its application for nonprofit status for seven years, related to it having pro-Israel views. To me it would seem inappropriate to give it star billing as the one and only "Z Street" in Wikipedia, when Z Street is a somewhat common term / name of a street. Or the Z Street Band based in Orlando, Florida, probably also known for short as "Z Street" could get the star billing inappropriately if someone chose to develop an article about it....it appears marginally notable to me as well.

Also the dab currently includes bluelinks Z Street (Portland, Oregon) and Z Street (Washington, D.C.) which are redirects to articles which, indeed, wouldn't properly be titled "Z Street", but rather cover Reed Street the end of the alphabet line in Portland and the non-existence of J, X, Y, Z in Washington, D.C.

By the way, I believe that "X Street" was mostly avoided in practice due to its appearing to be a reference to Jesus Christ. That is stated somewhere in the Washington DC streets coverage, and I suspect it is the reason why Portland Oregon gave its "Xth" street a different name. There are certainly many usages of both X and Z though. It seems to me that it is helpful for Wikipedia to have coverage on "Z Street" and "X Street" and other names, as names, and I think that comes in the form of a disambiguation page. Either naturally or awkwardly or as an abomination inciting strong emotions, depending on one's views. -- Doncram ( talk) 19:15, 6 February 2021 (UTC) reply

A redirect to a street in Portland, Oregon that has never existed [1] seems pointess, so Z Street (Portland, Oregon) is now up for discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 February 6#Z Street (Portland, Oregon). -- John B123 ( talk) 19:52, 6 February 2021 (UTC) reply

• Delete there are no actual articles being disambiguated here. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 19:38, 8 February 2021 (UTC) reply
• Delete. Ultimately this is a page that disambiguates zero articles. -- Kinu  ^t/ _c 02:40, 10 February 2021 (UTC) reply
• Speedy delete per G14. There's nothing here, zip, nada. Clarityfiend ( talk) 04:49, 11 February 2021 (UTC) reply
• Delete Not a DAB page. Deleting this does not undermine other X Street dab pages at all. ---- Pontificalibus 13:38, 12 February 2021 (UTC) reply
• Comment. Thanks everyone, this has been very helpful discussion. It would have been more helpful if anyone else had thought to try to grapple with the actual problem, that "Z Street" and similar article names in Wikipedia should not be given over to just any minor usage which might be claimed (e.g. for a band or a political organization). Nor should all of these go to the article/section about street naming in just the city of Washington, D.C. This has to do with principles of avoiding reader surprise, and what is to be done when there is no specific wp:PRIMARYUSAGE present. The answer is not to avoid the problem. What is needed is some kind of bland dead end, like what a disambiguation page can provide, with bland allusion to the true general fact that "Z Street" or similar is a street name used in many cities, and there is no one overwhelming world-wide primary topic single usage. BUT NO, that would blow the minds of editors hyper-focused on disambiguation pages and their (dysfunctional, unfriendly-to-readers in my opinion) rules. So, one alternative would be to use wp:SIA "Set Index Article" system which was created originally and expressly to extract certain disambiguation pages from the hyper-focused editors. Just slap {{ SIA}} on a page and drop disambiguation identification, and then it is okay to use words and sources/footnotes and to provide common-sense text and lists of items to serve Wikipedia readers. I mused about doing just that, but the disambiguation-focused editors, once all riled up, are hard to dissuade. After a while, I come around to thinking that a new big article on street naming and numbering, as covered in this American Planning Association report "Street naming and numbering", and covering each of "Z Street", "Y Street", etc. there would be better. And it turns out we do have Street or road name article, not the greatest since sliced bread, but can be adapted. So see now Street or road name#Lettered and numbered streets, which is a suitable target section, and where I have set up anchors for "Z Street", etc. So redirecting "Z Street" to Street or road name#Z Street seems okay, and I have done that.-- Doncram ( talk) 20:40, 12 February 2021 (UTC) reply

This is a nonsense. If there is a notable topic titled "Z Street" which happens to be e.g. "a band or a political organization" then that should be located at this page. This wouldn't be "giving over to just any minor usage which might be claimed" it would be a notable topic. Should any street named Z Street become notable then an article can be created for it and a dab page placed here. There are over 2,000 streets in the UK called "Station Road" yet only one of them is listed at Station Road. This isn't misleading, it's how readers expect an encyclopedia to work - only listing notable instances of a topic.---- Pontificalibus 07:26, 13 February 2021 (UTC) reply

• Comment: Ready to close i think, with fact that the article has been redirected to Street or road name#Z Street. -- Doncram ( talk) 20:40, 12 February 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Whilst I support changing to a redirect, I'm not sure doing so whilst this discussion is still in progress is appropriate. -- John B123 ( talk) 21:14, 12 February 2021 (UTC) reply
    • Yes, it is hard to let go, I understand. Victory should be more like pummelling me with 20 or more templates on my Talk page (already done), and complaining wildly/widely because I asked you to stop with that and discuss somewhere centrally instead, and further gathering up a mob to score AFD deletions. Accomplishing violations of Wikipedia's fundamental policies (see wp:TNTTNT) by deleting stuff which will likely be recreated later (when a couple "Z Street" articles have eventually been created). -- Doncram ( talk) 22:19, 12 February 2021 (UTC) reply
• Comment The problem with this redirect that has now been but in place is that the target contains no cited use of the term. Someone may spend some considerable time scouring the section targeted by the redirect and following up the sources, only to discover that there is no notable Z-street. Far better to delete and thus make this obvious.--07:19, 13 February 2021 (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.