| Revision as of 04:25, 30 January 2006 editGolfcam (talk | contribs)3,176 edits →[]← Previous edit | Revision as of 04:37, 30 January 2006 edit undoR. fiend (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers24,205 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| <div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;"> | |||
| :''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page. '' | |||
| <!-- | |||
| Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links in order to create a new discussion page using the name format of ]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. --> | |||
| The result of the debate was speedy unlist. Currently at ] -] 04:37, 30 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ===]=== | ===]=== | ||
| This article was listed previously. | This article was listed previously. | ||
| Line 13: | Line 19: | ||
| *'''Keep''', but maybe rename it to ], so as to include Ohio and California, instead of just having them seem oddly out of place. ] 03:53, 30 January 2006 (UTC) | *'''Keep''', but maybe rename it to ], so as to include Ohio and California, instead of just having them seem oddly out of place. ] 03:53, 30 January 2006 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Keep''' Notable and well organised information. ] 04:25, 30 January 2006 (UTC) | *'''Keep''' Notable and well organised information. ] 04:25, 30 January 2006 (UTC) | ||
| :''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.</div> | |||
Revision as of 04:37, 30 January 2006
- 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 of the debate was speedy unlist. Currently at WP:DRV -R. fiend 04:37, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
List of state-named Avenues in Washington, D.C.
This article was listed previously.
The result was no consensus, and as is normal for such a result the article was kept. Someone has queried this result on the basis that he thinks the discussion favored deletion, and he has taken the unusual step of going to Misplaced Pages:Deletion review to try to get it deleted. Since Deletion Review is one of our few forums that are not consensus-based, I think it's probably fairer if the article is relisted for discussion in this consensus-based forum. I recommend, I admit rather lukewarmly, a keep, and present my arguments below. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 02:57, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- Looks like a perfectly good article to me. The existence, in the one full part of the United States that does not have statehood, and moreover the one devoted wholly to government of the United States, of streets (mostly avenues) named after all fifty states of the Union, is no coincidence, and a list of those streets is of encyclopedic value. It is of perhaps as much encyclopedic value as the list of streets of Atlentic City that appear in the US monopoly board, or lists of streets in London that appear in the British version. That is to say: not much, but the net value is positive and the article is unlikely to pose any great maintenance problems. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 02:57, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- Keep. Agree with Tony Sidaway. The article has encyclopedic value, is completely verifable, and is more expandable than a category is. The content is certainly more encyclopedic than other lists we've deemed notable enough for inclusion. —Cleared as filed. 03:06, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- Keep. Provides more than a category can, as it includes redlinks, and can include redirects (like if Ohio Drive were to redirect to the park it's contained in). Provides more than a redirect to U.S. state can, as it links to the roads. Provides more than Category:Streets in Washington, D.C. can, as it pulls out the ones specifically named after states - because, you know, not everyone lives in the U.S. or has the names of the states memorized. (I have split them off into a subcategory, but I don't have high hopes for its survival.) Common sense, dudes. This does more good than the zero harm in keeping it. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 03:14, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- Keep useful list --Jaranda 03:24, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- Keep, I stand by the opinion I expressed the first time around. - SimonP 03:44, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- Keep, but maybe rename it to List of state-named Roads (or Streets) in Washington, D.C., so as to include Ohio and California, instead of just having them seem oddly out of place. Rory096 03:53, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- Keep Notable and well organised information. Golfcam 04:25, 30 January 2006 (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.