Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/State Route 1002 (Lehigh County, Pennsylvania)
Tools
Actions
General
Print/export
In other projects
Appearance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. Krimpet (talk) 22:12, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Redundant article, needs to be deleted. The article is about a non-notable road in some city in Pennsylvania. The route is not even a notable state highway and there's no proaf or shields to prove this exist. Don't block me for this, because I know this needs to go. -- Lingosheet090 20:51, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy keep bad faith nom. Article is indeed notable. -- JA10 T · C 20:53, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Please, please, please always assume good faith. That being said, it is a former alignment of a U.S. Highway, and the lengthy, well-referenced history section proves it's notability, as well as its existence. -- NORTH talk 21:00, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Per NORTH, you're not assuming good faith, you should be blocked for this. -- JA10 T · C 21:03, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Ummm... I was referring to you, JA10, when you called it a bad faith nom. -- NORTH talk 21:05, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. The route is in Allentown, Pennsylvania, the state's third-largest city in population (not just "some city"), the article is well-written, substantial, and well-cited. There is proof that the route exists (Lehigh County map on the article's page). It's also a former U.S. Route. I don't see how it's redundant, though. --MPD T / C 21:06, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Agreed, I meant to mention the "redundant" thing in my comment as well. That one didn't make sense to me. -- NORTH talk 21:08, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy keep per above. --myselfalso 21:07, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per above. --Feedloadr 21:11, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Though technically, it is an unsigned highway, it is on the PennDOT roster and most likely has quadrant route markers to prove its existence. —Scott5114↗ 21:24, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy keep per above. --Bossi (talk ;; contribs) 21:25, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Deletemany streets in a city, I don't see articles on them this is just a street. Its just a local unsigned two lane road. -- 209.244.30.231 21:28, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Agreed, its just a street. -- Lingosheet090 21:29, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- IPs are not allowed to vote? --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 22:01, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not sure if they are, but this one is an obvious sockpuppet; it even put the AFD tag on the article. I'm striking out its vote. --NE2 22:03, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- IPs are not allowed to vote? --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 22:01, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep; the article needs a bit of work (I just failed its Good article nomination) but is definitely one of the relatively rare notable secondary routes. A search in Google Books reveals that it has eight diners, almost one per mile; this gives another measure of historic importance as one of the main streets of Allentown, the third-largest metropolitan area in Pennsylvania. I wonder if Tilghman Street would be a better name though. I also note that the nominator has only edited this AFD; I remember JohnnyAlbert10 having issues with "trolls" in the past; could it be the same person? There are also some interesting edits by 209.244.30.231 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), who has edits related to JohnnyAlbert10 for months in the past. --NE2 21:41, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Main thoroughfare of a major city. Even if it weren't state maintained, it has sufficient history and local importance to deserve an article. However, I am also leaning towards moving this to Tilghman Street per NE2. --Polaron | Talk 21:45, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per above. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 22:01, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Important comment This is the user's first edit: [[1]]. Thus, move for speedy close. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 22:03, 2 May 2007 (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.