Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Third Avenue (Brooklyn)

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 delete. v/r - T P 23:47, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Third Avenue (Brooklyn)[edit]

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

Article is completely unsourced and we have no proof at all that this street meets General notability or Notability Guidelines for streets. The "Route description" section, while true based on my experience, appears to be entirely original research, which is clearly not allowed on Wikipedia. Almost all of the information appears to have been added by people who add what they see with their own two eyes, which is not a reliable source for Wikipedia. The only thing that is sourcable is that the a few bus routes run on this street, which clearly does not make it notable enough for Wikipedia because almost every street in New York City has a bus route running on it. No one can explain what is so "important" about this street that it has to have an article here. I am also nominating the following related pages because it has almost the exact problems with lack of reliable sources proving its importance and original research information:

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:14, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:15, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete—based on my searches, there does not appear to sources about the street, just tangential references to places on the street. Imzadi 1979 → 02:23, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: When was third avenue laid out? We can't assume its non-notable because its a shitty article in is current form, by that standard we could delete 1/3rd of wikipedia tomorrow. AfD is not for cleanup. Is it true that its a major thoroughfare?--Milowent • ^hasspoken 03:14, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- The article has been like that since its creation 3 1/2 years ago. No one monitors these street articles because very few people know anything about them and we cannot have these articles containing short, unsourced or original research information forever (the fact is many Brooklyn street articles are like this, which is why I also nominated Fifth Avenue for deletion). Based on the numerous times I have drove down Third Avenue, it may be a major thoroughfare since the Brooklyn Queens Expressway runs above it at a certain point, but we have no source for that (what we see with our two eyes is not considered a source for Wikipedia). Even if we did, however, that does not make it notable because many highways around the country run alongside or above local streets. For example, the Belt Parkway runs alongside a residential road called "Shore Parkway" when it travels through Coney Island, Brighton Beach, and Sheepshead Bay. Searching Third Avenue on any Search Engine comes up with no information from the NYC DOT or any other reliable website confirming the history and notability of this street, just yellow pages for random businesses there. The Legendary Ranger (talk) 14:24, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: How come Fourth Avenue (Brooklyn) seems to be more notable, hence a deletion notice was not implemented on it? It doesn't really read that much OR but it could still use work, as all of them could. Tinton5 (talk) 03:46, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, 4th Av is a much bigger deal; former parkway designed and administered under Brooklyn Parks Dept, with buildings now landmarked, and hosting a major subway line. Starts in Times Plaza, now a big shopping district and soon to be Bklyns answer to MSG. First leg of NY Marathon, and probably a bunch of other distinctions I don't even know about. 3rd & 5th have my affection, but I'm short of reasons why they ought not be reduced to entries in a table. Jim.henderson (talk) 13:45, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reply: I am reluctant to nominate Fourth Avenue for deletion because it has an active subway line running underneath (there has to be a significant reason why it was kept while the Fifth Avenue Elevated was closed). This might cause some inexperienced editors to vote to keep it in an AfD just like they did with 20th Avenue (Brooklyn), which clearly is not notable enough to have its own article even though there are two subway stations serving it. As a heads up, if nothing happens to the 20th Avenue article by next month, I will renominate it for deletion and hopefully this time, people will get the picture that it has no significance in New York City history. We have an article called List of Brooklyn avenues, 1–28 where all the confirmable contents from the avenue articles can be put there and redirected to. I am also considering merging the three Vanderbilt Avenue articles together being that they are all relatively short and not likely to be expanded because I have not been able to find anything significant about these streets except that they were named after a notable family. To the person who commented above me, type in proper English please. The Legendary Ranger (talk) 14:08, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:41, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Street does not appear to be special, just one of many numbered avenues in Brooklyn. Dough 48 72 00:33, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete - The street may not stand out that much, even if it runs near a major train line (or used to, per last sentence). I can't tell if the first sentence is opinionated or factual, claiming that "Third Avenue is an important avenue", which is about 5 miles in length, mostly parallel with I-278. If there are sources for historical significance or any claim of notability established, then I am not against keeping this. However, based on the lack of sources, it seems to me that the author used some OR and states that this street is important for his morning commute. I don't know. But for now, I am saying a weak delete. Tinton5 (talk) 03:41, 16 March 2012 (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.