Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kew Gardens Interchange

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. Sr13 05:57, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Kew Gardens Interchange

Kew Gardens Interchange (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

It's an interchange. It's not anything more than an interchange. It has a name primarily for traffic reports. I don't see this article ever being significantly expanded. CitiCat 01:56, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

• Comment. I can understand the concern, an interchange is something people usually pass through and think nothing more of. Note that there is some coverage here and it is not out of the question that articles on nodes between different highways can be as justifiable as articles on the highways themselves. Sjakkalle (Check!) 06:12, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I saw that site before I posted the AFD, it just highlights various interchanges in New York, not because there's anything particularly interesting about any of them. Also, I've driven through this area probably 200 times a year for the past ten years, and I've never heard this interchange mentioned on the news outside of a traffic report. CitiCat 13:27, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 08:43, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
• Keep An extremely complex interchange that is a frequent site of accidents and delays. A big part of the interchange's notability is that it is mentioned constantly on WCBS and WINS traffic reports. Sources have been added, from among the ample list of available sources, and plenty more can be added. Alansohn 17:34, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
• Keep sources are adequate. If you've driven through and not noticed, it may be because the interchange is so complicated that it is not clear from the ground that it is a single complex. I unfortunately know it well. DGG 22:03, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
• Keep If it does have so many accidents in the past, it must have been mentioned by countless newspapers, and that gives some notability to it. Also, since it's a complex piece of infrastructure, it also is notability due to that.--Kylohk 15:40, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. Newspapers were talking about it (as the "pretzel") even before it opened in 1936: [1] The Library of Congress has four historic photos specifically of the interchange. --NE2 23:30, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
• Keep there are lots of reliable primary, secondary, and tertiary sources out there. Add the fact that this one is large and has lots of accidents reported on it; it's definitely notable. (→zelzany - is one angry user) 00:36, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
• Keep - As a former London NYC resident, I too unfortunately know this absurd transportation maze. As WP:IDONTLIKEIT is not a reason to delete an article, I'll go by reliable sources writing about this thing. Similar to the SF Bay Area's MacArthur Maze. --Oakshade 01:39, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
  • London? Is [2] or another nearby interchange called the "Kew Gardens Interchange"? I don't see anything on Google, but it's not always perfect. --NE2 05:44, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

  Hah! I'm spacing. Meant NY. Was in London before that and there's a Kew Gardens there too! (but no internchange). Too much Tylonol PM tonight. --Oakshade 06:24, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

• Keep of both historical and current interest, and plenty of material is available for expansion. Dhaluza 16:22, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

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.