Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of MUTCD-influenced traffic signs


 * 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 no consensus. The only consensus I see here is that this article is a mess and needs a lot of work. But there is also the opinion that some of the content here is salvageable. So, good luck to the editors who want to take on this "refocusing" project! Liz Read! Talk! 04:01, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Comparison of MUTCD-influenced traffic signs

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

This article stands or falls on the central premise that the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices has influenced the sign design of other countries. While I am sure that it has in some cases, the premise is unsourced and is resulting in original research as applied to several countries. Rschen7754 17:35, 2 January 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:00, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Rschen7754 17:35, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment the article is in any case a real mess. The lead includes sentences that are logically meaningless ("They, along with the US Virgin Islands, are also the only countries listed here which drive on the left—with the exception of Liberia and the Philippines (though partial), both of which drive on the right."). The table is horrendously unhelpfully laid-out; on my fairly average laptop, the horizontal scroll-bar can't fit on the screen at the same time as the column-headings, which means scrolling is a process of moving randomly for a bit, then going back up to see where we've reached. This has happened in part because someone wrote the table the wrong way round (it only needed 6 columns if it had been done as a vertical table), and partly because it's had to include a list of all secondary languages used in each country, which takes up a huge amount of screen-space without being particularly relevant to the subject. We shouldn't inflict this sort of disaster on our readers. But I suspect the article exists as a complementary article to Vienna_Convention_on_Road_Signs_and_Signals. If it were re-worked in that spirit, and shorn of speculation and meaningless waffle, it might be good. Elemimele (talk) 18:36, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment The chart comparing the various street signs is interesting, but the article is largely unsourced, appears to be OR. Not sure we could draftify at this point. Oaktree b (talk) 19:18, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
 * If the content is to be salvaged I would suggest refactoring it by an objective criterion like a region i.e. North America, though I will confess that I am a bit skeptical of that sort of article too. --Rschen7754 01:34, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
 * This clearly needs a lot of work, as there is notable encyclopaedic information here, the question is whether the best way to achieve this is via heavy editing or TNT. I don't support draftifcation as that's more than likely just going to end up quietly being deleted under G13 in 6 or so months having failed to attract anybody's attention; likewise deletion will make it harder for people to extract the notable information from this article - the tables need reformatting (the first needs rotating 90°, the second needs splitting (possibly by continent) as it's too large) but there was a lot of work involved in creating them that would be a shame to throw away rather than reuse. So ultimately, I arrive at keep but refocus and improve. Thryduulf (talk) 10:41, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Is there a tool or script for rotating tables? Otherwise it's a nightmare of a job! Elemimele (talk) 12:54, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
 * A roundabout way would be to copy the table markup, convert that to CSV, import the CSV into a spreadsheet, cut that to the clipboard, use paste special to transpose it. Then copy that output and convert it to a MediaWiki table and paste it into the article. This would probably take about 2 minutes, but it's quite likely there is a better way that I don't know about! Thryduulf (talk) 15:04, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 05:49, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment: I'm conflicted about this page. Parts of it are a useful, but it is a mess, and its also almost entirely WP:OR, with most of the remaining WP:SYNTH. I'd lean Keep, but this might be a burn it down and someone can start over if they want situation.  // Timothy :: talk  16:10, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * 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.