Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hay Street, Sydney

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 no consensus. Stifle (talk) 09:53, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hay Street, Sydney[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Does not appear to meet WP:GNG or WP:GEOROAD - no significant coverage by independent sources DannyS712 (talk) 07:01, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. DannyS712 (talk) 07:03, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment article creator is currently blocked (unrelated to behavior at this article), not due to expire until after the usual AFD timeframe. DMacks (talk) 07:10, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:27, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:27, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:27, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No indication this street is notable; I cannot find any significant coverage.-- P-K3 (talk) 14:37, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
A redirect would also be fine. P-K3 (talk) 11:22, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Hay Street was the first street created in Sydney outside of the original Sydney Cove settlement, there should be some sources on it. Have you tried the State Library or Sydney City Council? At present a ~~Merge~~Redirect to Sydney central business district or to Haymarket, New South Wales wouldn't go astray? Deus et lex (talk) 10:22, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Deus et lex: Not sure a merge is useful - the only content is "Hay Street is a street in the Sydney central business district." - redirect? --DannyS712 (talk) 10:56, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@DannyS712: - apologies, I did mean a redirect! I have fixed this. Deus et lex (talk) 11:00, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- I would also support a redirect
~~weak~~ keep looking at the street, it has the light rail running along it theres some reference to it history "FOUR DECADES IN HAY-ST.—DAWN GATHERING IN SYDNEY". The West Australian. Western Australia. 29 April 1939. p. 24. Retrieved 13 May 2020 – via Trove. there are number incidents that have taken place on the street over time. At the cnr of Pitt Street was Presbyterian Manse built in 1846, Paddy's Market and 181-187 Hay Street, Sydney as heritage places. Theres any article in there somewhere on Trove there are a substantive list of media articles related to the street, given the markets it'll take time to dig out the notable ones, the Capitol Theatre, Sydney stage door is on Hay street also. As merge/redirect target would be better to the suburb of Haymarket, Sydney which its self probably derives from Hay st being where the markets were moved to make them close to Darling harbor(my OR/Synth). Gnan garra 04:37, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

add this source http://nswaol.library.usyd.edu.au/data/pdfs/22637_ID_Annable1989FormerAustralianGasLightCompanySiteArchExTextVol1.pdf about the manse.... Gnan garra 04:39, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Sydney central business district or Haymarket, New South Wales. Regardless of any perceived notability, with no content other than "Hay Street is a street in the Sydney central business district" and a 7-year-old image, the article has no encylopaedic value to the reader. It's best to redirect this directly to either of the suggested articles so the reader doesn't have to click twice. That said, I would also agree that delete is certainly an option I'd support. --AussieLegend (✉) 08:23, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Obviously the article needs work, but this is a major street in a major city which is lined with historic buildings. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:31, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 13:31, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If only the article told us that. Maybe it should be redirected to this page. --AussieLegend (✉) 15:14, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Almost no content, just one shoret sentence. Teraplane (talk) 23:09, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is a very historic street but the article fails to cover almost all the information, Needs major work. DCook58 (Talk) 03:03, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, without prejudice of recreation if someone wants to actually write a notable article on it. It's one of those which might pass WP:GNG if someone does an NLA search and puts a little work into it. SportingFlyer T·C 08:20, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:GNG as is. Might be proven notable if proper research was done, but this one sentence article is both meaningless and makes no claim to notability of any kind. That it exists does not warrant a Wikipedia article. Newshunter12 (talk) 05:15, 20 May 2020 (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.