Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kreuz Dortmund/Witten

This article will address Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kreuz Dortmund/Witten from a broad and detailed approach, with the aim of providing the reader with a complete and in-depth vision of this topic. Its origins, evolution and relevance today will be explored, as well as its implications in different areas. Different perspectives, expert opinions and relevant data will be analyzed that will allow the reader to comprehensively understand Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kreuz Dortmund/Witten. In addition, case studies and concrete examples will be presented that will illustrate the importance and impact of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kreuz Dortmund/Witten in today's society. Through this article, we seek to offer an informed and enriching perspective on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kreuz Dortmund/Witten, which invites reflection and debate.
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.  Sandstein  09:56, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Kreuz Dortmund/Witten (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Was de-prodded with a lengthy rationale. However, the rationale never successfully addresses the point that this particular interchange passes WP:GNG. Just another interchange like thousands of others. Onel5969 TT me 14:36, 24 December 2015 (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.