Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dreieck Drammetal

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. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 20:42, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dreieck Drammetal

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

Was part of a blanket AfD, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dreieck Ahlhorner Heide, which was closed as no consensus for procedural reasons. Non-notable interchange, just like thousands of others. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:03, 21 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete—having a name in a country where every interchange is named does not confer notability. This article fails WP:GNG and should be deleted. Imzadi 1979 → 22:55, 21 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose deletion of this and all similar articles: in Germany, only Autobahn intersections are named - see also my comment at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Highways#German highway interchanges. Bahnfrend (talk) 07:49, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. As the discussion on the group AfD commented , we would keep them if they were British. But the English language WP covers all the world equally -- it just is written in English If it covers AEnglish-speakign countries more, it's because most of our contributors are more interested. We should welcome attempts to expand equal coverage to other language areas. DGG ( talk ) 04:44, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - the discussion also commented that each interchange should be judged on its own merits as to whether or not it passes GNG, which this one clearly does not. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:29, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- We would keep them if they were British because if they were British a named interchange would be notable. This is German, and named interchanges in Germany are WP:RUNOFTHEMILL. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 09:23, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No evidence that WP:GNG is met. There are no WP:BIAS issues and no editorial misconduct, there is only Notability, and that is not present. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 09:23, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:40, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:47, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:47, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Merge: [1] suggests that the interchange in question is an ongoing black spot, eg 2009, 2015, however that's limited notability at best (ie: places have worse non-named black spots). How about a List of German Autobahn Interchanges article instead to briefly tabulate key information? Interchanges significant enough to warrant an individual article can be linked from there, and non-significant interchanges can redirect there (noting that Bundesautobahn 38 and other similar pages don't currently link to named interchanges!). ^~~Hydronium^~Hydroxide^~(Talk)~~ 09:56, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Response It's far from clear that this suggestion is the best solution. Part of the problem is that the English Wikipedia articles about individual Autobahns are pretty much exclusively only stubs or start articles, and their German Wikipedia equivalents are generally not well referenced by the standards of English Wikipedia. Most importantly, at the present time there is no consensus for the deletion of these German Autobahn interchange articles as a block, and insufficient time allocated by the AfD process for editors to research their GNG individually. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kreuz Oranienburg and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kreuz Duisburg. Bahnfrend (talk) 06:07, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
delete As with the others, there is no claim of notability, and contrary to various claims otherwise, there is not and never has been a presumption of notability for highway interchanges. Mangoe (talk) 03:11, 4 January 2016 (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.