Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Interstate 76 in Colorado

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 MERGE to Interstate 76 (west). Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Interstate 76 in Nebraska for detailed rationale.-Splash - tk 17:11, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interstate 76 in Colorado[edit]

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

This is redundant to Interstate 76 (west). SALT and redirect. Rschen7754 (T C) 22:24, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. This article has a lengthy history, and is referenced by a reliable source. And define SALT. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mo42 (talk • contribs) — Mo42 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
Interesting first edit. --Rschen7754 (T C) 22:30, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- See WP:SALT, which Rschen7754 should have at least linked to. --NE2 07:04, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I worked on this article, and like the other person said, "it is referenced by a reliable source." Did they check the source? 72.130.41.48 22:27, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The article covers a route that is at least 50 miles long. Sure, it can use imporovement for the section "Route description", but its "History" section is neat and well-covered. It can possibly use more references. Anyways, I vote for keep! Alittlegoo 22:29, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- A WP:SOCK of the creator of the article. --Rschen7754 (T C) 22:41, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, redundant, we don't need this article, this can just go on the Interstate 76 (west) article.—JA10 Talk • Contribs 22:30, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and protect against recreation. The remainder of this route (in Nebraska) is only 3 miles long. We do not need state-detail articles here; everything can be covered in Interstate 76 (west). —Scott5114 ↗ 22:31, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Really? So why don't Interstate 78 in New York be deleted then if that would be the case? That article covers a mere 1 mile and the article is still standing. Now why not an article with 180 miles? If might as well delete, why don't we merge the information covered in Interstate 78 in New York to Interstate 78? 72.130.41.48 22:33, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Nice double voting. --Rschen7754 (T C) 22:34, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - So you're not allowed to vote twice? What about adding onto your first message? 72.130.41.48 22:35, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - No, you're not allowed to vote twice. —Scott5114↗ 22:36, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      - Well, the I-78 in NY article has way to much significant history and is about a short road that enters the most populous city in the country, compared an redundant article on a 3 mile road.—JA10 Talk • Contribs 22:37, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        [double edit conflict] The reason why I-78 in NY is still there is because there are lots more interesting history than the two parts of I-76 (W) combined. Wikipedia is inconsistent. O₂ (息 • 吹) 22:38, 12 November 2007 (GMT)
Obvious ~~Delete~~redirect (merge) to I-76 (W), and SALT the redirect. There is no reason at all to split Interstate 76 (west) into state-detail articles, as all but three miles are located in Colorado. Thus, the entirety of the route can easily be covered in I-76 (W). --TMF ^{Let's Go Mets - Stats} 22:39, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Although I haven't come to Wikipedia in a while, I still believe that this article is notable as it contains enough information to stand on its own. Notable articles SHOULD be kept. D-Otani (I'm NOT a teacher!) 22:39, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
- Right, but so would an article like U.S. History 1776-2005. The point is that the remainder doesn't have enough to stand on its own and should be merged as a grand unified Interstate 76 (west). —Scott5114 ↗ 22:43, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge back into Interstate 76 (west). There's nothing more to say about the portion in Nebraska, so there's no need for separate articles. This is not a typical split into state-detail articles, but is more akin to splitting Interstate 684. --NE2 00:34, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per Rschen7754's nomination, since highways have no inherent notability, and this road portion lacks multiple reliable and independent sources with substantial coverage to satisfy WP:N. Edison 03:17, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Highways do have an inherent notability, but this particular portion doesn't need an article. —Scott5114 ↗ 21:29, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per NE2. ----DanTD 03:24, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per NE2 master son^{T - C} 17:57, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Interstate 76 (west) and Salt; this is totally redundant. I-76 runs all of three miles in Nebraska and as such, all can and should be covered in the parent article. --Mhking (talk) 23:51, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Contingent on Interstate 76 in Colorado being merged, then Merge also. -- KelleyCook (talk) 13:23, 18 November 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.