Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/M43 (Durban)

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. This is unsourced and sources arguably do not exist. I don't see how we can maintain an article that is not OR in these circumstances. On that basis I would accept the argument that V takes precedence over the SNG.

We have been here many times before and when faced with a core policy indicating deletion against an SNG supporting inclusion the answer is always to revisit the the SNG. On that basis the policy based argument is that this is an unsourced article that cannot be sourced. Spartaz ^Humbug! 05:39, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

M43 (Durban) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:GNG. WP:GEOROAD states "topic notability for county roads... are presumed to be notable if they have been the subject of multiple published secondary sources which contain significant coverage and are reliable and independent of the subject" which there is no evidence of. ––– GMH MELBOURNE TALK 09:26, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and South Africa. ––– GMH MELBOURNE TALK 09:26, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:17, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
• Speedy keep because this isn't even a county road. WP:GEOROAD clearly says "national, state and provincial highways are typically notable." So this is a flawed nomination. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 12:43, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
• Keep - Per LilianaUwU, this is not a county road and does meet the notability criteria for GEOROAD. The metropolitan routes in South Africa are more similar to state/provincial routes in other countries. Dough4872 13:08, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

  It says it's maintained by eThekwini Metropolitan Municipality. Wouldn't that be a county? ––– GMH MELBOURNE TALK 14:04, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

  Routes like NY 895 are maintained by New York City, but that doesn't make them any less of a state highway, no? LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 14:57, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

  Yes but they have sources that meet WP:GNG to make them notable. ––– GMH MELBOURNE TALK 00:04, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

  Per WP:N, actual policy, an article only needs to meet GNG or an SNG. GEOROAD is the SNG here. If the other editors here say that this topic meeds GEOROAD, then it doesn't matter if it does or doesn't meet GNG, per policy, a fact that many editors seem to have forgotten. Imzadi 1979 → 03:59, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

  Well the SNG says "county roads... are presumed to be notable if they have been the subject of multiple published secondary sources which contain significant coverage and are reliable and independent of the subject" which this article does not have. ––– GMH MELBOURNE TALK 04:08, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

  WP:N isn't a policy, it's a guideline. See the box at the top of the page cf: "This page documents an English Wikipedia notability guideline". That's why GMHM and my comments are about policies. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:47, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

• Keep. Meets WP:GEOROAD as above. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:20, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
• Delete - The only source is one saying it was renamed, and I can't find any other sources, also not a suitable redirect term. To those advocating WP:GEOROAD, remember that is a guideline while WP:V and WP:DP are policies. If this was notable, I'd create No Name Street, Sandwich as it has as much coverage in reliable sources as this street. () Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 11:52, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 23:00, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

• Delete This seems like one that needs a long explanation. @Ritchie333:'s rationale seems to be solid. The WP:GEOROAD automatic notability covers Road networks: International road networks (such as the International E-road network), Interstate, national, state and provincial highways - but this does not appear to one of those: our article describes it as a a short metropolitan route and Metropolitan Routes in Durban describes it as intra-city. In this case it appears our guide allows this article to be kept if there is multiple published secondary sources which contain significant coverage and are reliable and independent of the subject.. My WP:BEFORE has shown me that there is none to be found Even Google maps does not seem to recognize the road as significant. Ping me if anyone can come up with RS and I will change my ivote. Lightburst (talk) 15:17, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

Comment Metropolitan route networks predate the current municipal framework in South Africa, and were designed as intercity route networks. The fact that the municipal boundaries were expanded doesn’t change this fact (and in the cases of Johannesburg and Ekurhuleni they still do cross modern municipal boundaries). So they are not, strictly “intra-city” as these municipalities are enornmous and polycentric made up of separate cities and towns (I vaguely recall that the there was a political idea mooted to abolish provinces and replace them with municipalities which are a more valid second-tier government structure). So these routes are provincial in nature. Park3r (talk) 23:58, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

• Keep - Flawed nomination, I see nothing wrong with the article. Just needs to be expanded a little bit with more references. Plus, there's plenty of articles on Wikipedia, similar to this article, that look like this. Geko72290 (talk) 21:51, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

  But how is it meet wikipedias notability standards?

  Just needs to be expanded a little bit with more reference - References don't exist, if you find any, perhaps add them.

  there's plenty of articles on Wikipedia, similar to this article - see WP:OTHERSTUFF. ––– GMH MELBOURNE 22:59, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Your rationale is tough @Geko72290: because you have said Just needs to be expanded a little bit with more references.. But there are none to be found, if they WP:NEXIST the participants here, and myself, are unable to find them. Most of the other keeps here come from the belief that this intra-city route has automatic notability based on our guideline, but I believe that it does not. From your rationale you believe it can be expanded with sources, but it cannot because they do not exist. Lightburst (talk) 00:40, 18 October 2023 (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.