Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of sources for numbered routes in Rhode Island


 * 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   moved to WikiProject Rhode Island Routes/Comparison of sources for numbered routes in Rhode Island, a subpage of the related WikiProject. I left the title in its original state, although I assume others may move it to a shorter title if needed. Jamie  S93  00:55, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Comparison of sources for numbered routes in Rhode Island

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Article analyses the differences between sources. While possibly helpful for a Wikipedia namespace page, aren't we meant to be acting as a source here, not telling everyone the differences between others? \ Backslash Forwardslash / (talk) 21:47, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Move to Wikipedia namespace. This information should be preserved as part of WikiProject Rhode Island Routes. --Polaron | Talk 21:54, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge into Numbered routes in Rhode Island. This information belongs in the State Highways page. --Triadian (talk) 21:57, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Triadian (talk) 21:03, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: Just so everyone knows, User:SPUI hasn't edited in a long time. --Triadian (talk) 00:49, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Move to Wikipedia namespace. While some of the information contained may be appropriate for various articles including Numbered routes in Rhode Island and articles about the individual roads, organisations and places named/discussed, the page is not an article. An encyclopaedic article might be able to be written about these discrepancies, and the information here might be useful for such an article or section, but it would need a fundamental rewrite to become encyclopaedic. Additionally, turning this into an article would stop it being a useful project page. I'll leave a note about this discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. Roads. Thryduulf (talk) 08:54, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Wikipediafy. --Rschen7754 (T C) 09:10, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is not encyclopedic. If absolutely necessary, this content could be moved to WikiProject Rhode Island Routes or a subpage thereof. However, I am of the opinion that the cases where sources differ are better left to be sorted out by the editor and mentioned appropriately in the article pertaining to the route in question. --LJ (talk) 09:20, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Move to Wikipedia namespace. I agree with Thryduulf. --Fredddie™ 12:09, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as unmitigated roadnerdery. I can see no way to take this beyond fancrufty speculation. Mangoe (talk) 14:02, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete this reads like someone's notes or defense of using a given source in an FAC or similar review. I have no clue why someone would put this in an encyclopedia article. Dave (talk) 14:39, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Move to Wikipedia space as a subpage of WikiProject Rhode Island Routes. Looking at the history, the creator suggested this. --NE2 15:57, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Move to Wikipedia space (subpage of WikiProject Rhode Island Routes) as a resource for editors. It should be noted that it's a fairly unusual situation for a state DOT (the key source defining what is and isn't a state route) to conflict with itself with regard to route designations. Include any specific examples of conflict in the articles on the pertinent routes. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 00:20, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Move to Wikipedia space within WikiProject Rhode Island Routes. This information is not appropriate for an article, but is appropriate as a resource for the WikiProject. Dough4872 (talk) 18:08, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge -- If there is genuine confusion over the correct numbering of roads, it should appear in the article. However, I presume that the official numbering is the responsibility of State department, whose records will provide the definitive answer.  Other sources will not be derivative, and quite possibly inaccurate, and I presume that the source of the confusion comes at that level; if so, a brief statement in the article would be appropriate and the rest (or rather the whole) converted to a project sub-page.  No personal knowledge - I am in England.  Peterkingiron (talk) 20:57, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
 * merge into the article on the routes, or into Wikipedia space    DGG ( talk ) 01:54, 29 October 2009 (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.