Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dereboyu Avenue

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 keep. (non-admin closure) Spirit of Eagle (talk) 03:28, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dereboyu Avenue

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

Fails WP:GNG. Rather standard shopping street. The Banner talk 11:05, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I fully understand why the article has been nominated for deletion, as it certainly did not appear to satisfy GTG in its previous shape. However, I am afraid the rationale for deletion seems rather superficial to me. Being "rather standard" is a subjective statement and certainly not a valid reason to delete provided that independent and reliable sources exist, and this avenue has been covered by numerous articles on the Turkish Cypriot national press, some of which I have already added and some that I will be adding shortly. Of course, one could say that as Northern Cyprus is a small country, and any avenue in the capital would be bound to have some coverage on the press, but the amount of publicity and discussion centered around this one certainly exceeds any of the others by far (for example, Girne Avenue, which is the main street of the walled city) and meets the relevant criteria, while other avenues are only subjects of brief announcements. While of course, when compared to major cities, the avenue would seem standard and even dull, the definition of "standard" varies according to the location; it is the heart of the modern part of the capital of a nation, and it is certainly not "standard" in that sense. --GGT (talk) 16:19, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Cyprus-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:47, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:47, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

More sources have been found and added to the article. By now, it must be clear that there are indeed a good number of articles in the Turkish Cypriot press beyond daily municipal announcements about the avenue, and that it does satisfy the GTG criteria due to the existence of multiple, reliable, independent sources with either the avenue being the main topic or receiving significant coverage. --GGT (talk) 20:59, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per sources provided, ~~I'm not entirely sure whether we need an article on what seems to be essentially a High Street but meh~~ sources have been added so can't really see the harm in keeping. –Davey2010^Talk 23:45, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have considered a possible merger to quarter articles, but the current material included would probably be too much for them, and it has room for more development. There seem to be many other precedents anyway. --GGT (talk) 14:10, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GGT - Ah looks like I learned something new - Never was aware we had articles on London High Streets, In that case I'm all for keeping :) –Davey2010^Talk 20:12, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, let us make a deal, GGT. When you make the article more neutral in style and tone, I will withdraw the nomination. The Banner talk 14:17, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@The Banner: Sure thing, but could you please specify/exemplify your concerns, by, for example, giving a sample sentence from the article? I have played a little with the ambiguous tone in the intro but I fail to see what more could be done. I also fail to see how neutrality in style and tone relates to notability (GNG) and the AfD, but I truly appreciate the time spent for critical input. --GGT (talk) 14:46, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To start with, the section beginning with The avenue has become a center of entertainment and nightlife since the 1990s. The Banner talk 19:05, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What's wrong with that? Alakzi (talk) 19:18, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, I still fail to see anything. If it the phrase "center of entertainment" that sounds dubious, that is generally common in sources. Beyond that, I truly see nothing that would constitute a neutrality problem. And anyway, if there is such a problem, IMHO it would be more constructive to talk about it on the talk page with precise arguments and if necessary, tag the article, as stylistic problems are no grounds for deletion. --GGT (talk) 20:25, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 02:20, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 02:40, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Further information regarding history from a reliable book about Nicosia has been added to the article. The source talks in depth about the avenue in the 1950s. --GGT (talk) 17:24, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Appatent the major street in a capital city. DGG ( talk ) 03:22, 3 April 2015 (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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.