Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Transportation in Richmond, Virginia

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 keep. Physchim62 (talk·RfA) 21:38, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Transportation in Richmond, Virginia[edit]

This doesn't include any special information at all...it just lists the major ways of transportation that are available in the whole world. If we were to do this for every city in the world, the number of articles on Wikipedia would skyrocket. -- SoothingR 15:35, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This info is already covered in greater detail in the Richmond, Virginia page. tv316 17:16, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- Read the edit box comment "stub that Mark User:Vaoverland will add to per discussion on Talk:Richmond, Virginia." We had talked about this article on Talk:Richmond and there were no objections to it. It won't be a stub for long, since Vaoverland is a transportation subject matter expert who has contributed heavily to articles on the road and rail infrastructure in Virginia. Since wikipedia is not paper, and since Richmond is a bone fide metropolitan area (with over a million inhabitants) this topic is notable and the article will soon be very encyclopedic. $''PreviouslyunsignedcommentbyMPSat19:11,24October2005''$

I still think that we don't need an article on all ways of transportation in every city in the world -- SoothingR 19:25, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Transportation in Podunk Arkansas is one thing. Richmond is a state capital and is in the top 50 most populous MSAs in the country. [1]. Chicago has separate articles on Streets and highways of Chicago, Mass transit in Chicago, Airports of Chicago, Taxis of Chicago, Chicago Pedway, Chicago City Railway, Bicycling in Chicago, Multilevel streets in Chicago, and Rail stations of Chicago. I don't think it's too much to ask for one article to cover ALL TRANSPORTATION in Richmond, Virginia. MPS 19:35, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per MPS. Meelar (talk) 20:17, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per MPS. GTBacchus 20:29, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Transportation in and around Richmond is more of a big deal than in many other cities. This is due to the location at the fall line on the James River, which both 1. makes the city a transport hub, and 2. presents extra complications, such as the many bridges over the river. If we lose the separate article, whatever we write will just stay in the larger base article. I see benefit and don't see the harm of having the sub-article. Mark in Historic Triangle Vaoverland 20:41, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per MPS and Vaoverland. --Idont Havaname 23:08, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Transportation is a city or region wide thing and should be treated as such here. Articles on individual pieces of infrastructure, like roads, tend to ignore the purpose of why they exist (that is they focus on the experience of being on the road and things that are 50 meters on either side of it). Infrastructure was created and works as a system, not as a thousand unique pieces. This article is much better than dozens of articles, one for each road in Richmond. --maclean25 02:01, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Good to have a summary. Honbicot 03:44, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Vaoverland. Youngamerican 23:05, 26 October 2005 (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.