Talk:Marsha Sharp Freeway

It's called being bold
You don't need to start a discussion prior to every edit you make here. Can you provide me a good reason as to why this needs to be separate from U.S. Route 82 in Texas? This is a stub article that hasn't changed in the last year. Are you about to expand it?? --Holderca1talk 20:11, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Being bold in making edits is one thing. Being bold in deleting an entire article is another. That's why Wikipedia has a process for deleting articles but does not have a similar process for editing. →Wordbuilder (talk) 20:21, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * It wasn't deleted. --Holderca1talk 20:24, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, I boldly un-redirected it. →Wordbuilder (talk) 20:29, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Are you going to answer my question or just unilaterally revert without discussion? --Holderca1talk 20:31, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

The precedent for named freeways portions of numbered routes is to redirect to the numbered route. See Gulf Freeway which redirects to Interstate 45. Why should this article be an exception? --Holderca1talk 20:35, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Let's look at the facts. I created this article nearly three months before you created U.S. Route 82 in Texas. So, I certainly couldn't have added it to that article at the time. That said, I think Marsha Sharp Freeway should be merged into U.S. Route 82 in Texas. The problem isn't that we disagree; it's that you unilaterally deleted this article wth no discussion. You argue it wasn't deleted; but, when all that is left is a redirect, that's the same thing. Wikipedia is a community, what advantage is there in alienating a fellow editor rather than just using a simple merge tag? →Wordbuilder (talk) 21:02, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, this article hadn't had any substantial edits in 11 months, so it looked like an abandoned article. I thought it was an obvious move to redirect, so I was bold and did so.  But that is why we have WP:BRD, so I don't think I would have done anything different if I had to do it again.  I just created the US 82 in TX article a little while ago, it was a redirect itself to U.S. Route 82 article.  --Holderca1talk 21:13, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Granted that it's ideal for a stub to be expanded—and, I kicked myself for not getting pics of this the last two times I was in Lubbock—but is there some guideline that I'm unaware of that states that if an article isn't actively being edited that it is more eligibile for deletion? That makes it sound like stability is a bad thing. →Wordbuilder (talk) 21:23, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * No, just the fact that it wasn't active is why I didn't discuss beforehand. So are we good for a redirect? --Holderca1talk 21:37, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * There's not much here. My vote would be to merge it into the other article. It's about the right size for its own section. →Wordbuilder (talk) 21:41, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Done, it has been added. --Holderca1talk 21:52, 5 March 2008 (UTC)