Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ontario provincial highway 140

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was KEEP. -Splash 04:09, 28 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure if a highway is notable enough in its own right to have an encyclopedia article. Cheese Sandwich 19:38, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. I disagree. Also, are you prepared to nominate for deletion and shepherd through the process the 1000 or more articles that already exist for highways in all different countries, only to find that 99% of them would be kept? Courtland 20:02, August 21, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Consensus is emerging that "minor" roads should not be kept. See [1] Sdedeo 20:20, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • comment. The notion of "minor" is a country-by-country (perhaps a region-by-region) judgement based on the degree of infrastructure development. Courtland 21:57, August 21, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete cf the British roads debate. A 12 km highway in Ontario certainly does not warrant an entry. The existence of previous cruft should not be used to justify the inclusion of additional cruft. Dottore So 20:24, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, primary highways are verifiable and notable. JYolkowski // talk 20:25, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge all related articles into Ontario provincial highways. This article (Hwy 140) is simply a summary of an apparantly non-notable highway. Notable highways, like Ontario provincial highway 417 & British Columbia provincial highway 1 (backbone hwys, controversial, or otherwise important - ie. those with something to write about), should have an article. This, this is just a road that connects two other roads. -maclean25 20:41, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect I am changing my vote because the article is now redundent. All relevant info has been summarized into two sentences and merged into Ontario provincial highways. -maclean25 22:07, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Not sure if the article's creator is permitted to vote (if not, disregard the vote, but keep the following points in mind...). The highway (along with Hwy 58, to be exact) links a city of 18,000 to cities of 48,000, 18,000 and 130,000 (and onward). It's maintained by a province of some 12 million people. If we delete this, should Hwy 101 also go? Hwy 138? Hwy 69? Etc, etc? What you are proposing is a major reorganization of the Ontario provincial highways series. (As for merging, I don't think merging all of Ontario provincial highways is feasible from article length point of view.) --qviri 21:12, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • comment: certainly the author is allowed to vote. Courtland 21:53, August 21, 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment to address your concerns: The cities it links can be much better communicated using a map, not an article. Provinces maintain a lot of roads, this does not make it notable. Hwy 101 consists of one sentence, therefore notability not established. Same with Hwy 138 but it did get to two sentences. Hwy 69 is part of the Trans Canada Hwy, so it is notable and a keep. Putting two sentence summaries beside a name on a list is not a major reorganization. The article length can be shorten by sticking to relevant information and by remaining on topic. The current list goes into secondary and tertiary highways which should be placed into a sub list and noted on the main page as 'other highways' or what have you. -maclean25 22:07, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • By major reorganization I meant changing the format from a list of links, and the separate articles being as detailed as necessary to a list and two sentences for each highway, with a link to a separate article for more notable highways. (BTW, I fixed up hwy 140's two sentences a bit.) This is changing the format of an entire category. And what exactly makes a highway notable? The federal government designating it as "Trans-Canada"? A considerable amount of people using it? In my opinion a King's Highway (forgot to mention it before) is just as notable as an electoral district. Also, I am not sure about this -- is it possible to somehow link to the highway's entry on the big page? Otherwise, the user might get mightily confused when he gets the list of every highway in Ontario rather than the info of the one highway he's looking for. --qviri 00:50, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, important highway. Kappa 21:25, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, important highway. --File:Ottawa flag.png Spinboy 21:27, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, important highway. --Nicodemus75 22:08, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. With no intention to troll, what are your criteria for notability? What is the advantage of having separate articles for each road in the absence of other notability? Sdedeo 22:39, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Notable highway. Criterion is that people are likely to search for information on this road using the term and high level of usage as per Qviri. Capitalistroadster 23:48, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, this is not the QEW. It's not notable. Nandesuka 00:11, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: uh, pretty much every highway in Canada "is not the QEW", save perhaps for the 401. --qviri 00:50, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • What a coincidence! It also turns out that "pretty much every highway in Canada" isn't notable! Nandesuka 12:52, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • I see we're back to "different rules for Canadians" again. Unless you're seriously proposing a policy that highways should never have articles, highways in Canada are not one bit less notable than highways in the United States. Bearcat 15:38, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep all numbered state and provincial highways - roads which thousands of people drive on daily are far more notable than Podunk Elementary, even though they're not cute and warm and fuzzy like schools are. Perhaps we need WikiProject:Roadwatch? FCYTravis 06:53, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • comment There already exists a Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways. Courtland 08:43, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, it's a significant enough highway. I've used it myself and I don't even live in the country. Ben W Bell 08:48, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• I don't see any problem in keeping this Verifiable and NPOV article. It's not spam or vanity and clearly someone found it notable enough to write an article about it. DoubleBlue (Talk) 15:10, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep. It's like raising both hands! --SPUI (talk) 15:20, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete after checking the map. Can be mentioned in a list and in the relevant location articles. Gazpacho 16:49, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• For the record, I added some more information to the article. It's not terribly important, and we could live without it should we decide to merge the articles into a big list, but for the time being it's there. --qviri ^talk 18:13, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep; the definition of "notable highway", at least to me, is any highway that a federal, provincial or state government deems significant enough to be maintained and signed as a part of its official highway system. (I would not, for the record, extend this to numbered county roads, unless those county roads have an especially significant history.) Also notable within the context of Mid-Peninsula Highway and Highway 406 development plans. Bearcat 23:22, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please help out with Wikipedia:Consensus/B roads in the United Kingdom. Thanks. --SPUI (talk) 16:24, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • See [2], B-roads are local roads and since they do not form part of trunk routes they are county maintained. the wub "?/!" 21:16, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • I don't see anything saying that - from what I understand only the trunk roads (the most major of the A roads) are nationally maintained. And there are no states in the UK, so counties are next after the country. --SPUI (talk) 00:34, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
        • This is wrong, counties are not the equivolent of states. By the same token B roads are not state highways. In Britain, I would say that most state highways would be A roads. - Hahnchen 14:54, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• No vote since I know little about the Canadian road system. the wub "?/!" 21:16, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Ontario provincial highways If it ever grows to a size thats requires its own article it can be broken out from there. Pilatus 08:34, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletions. -- Visviva 12:16, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete insignificant road --TimPope 15:49, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, equal to a state highway in the US and we keep those.Gateman1997 17:34, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. I point you to Talk:Washington State Route 900. We have hundreds of state highway articles from the US and there are several canada highway articles as well (so much that we need a new stub category because road-stub is being filled). --Rschen7754
• Keep - Although very short in length, the road is a state highway. I'm guessing this in UK equivolence would either be a Motorway or an A road, notable enough. - Hahnchen 00:36, 26 August 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.