Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Division Street, Manhattan


 * 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 Keep --Stephen 04:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Division Street, Manhattan

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

no assertion of notability per WP:N Mh29255 (talk) 23:41, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - no context given for notability. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 00:53, 28 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. Nothing to indicate it reaches WP:50k notability. Grutness...wha?  00:56, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Notability is not a deletion criterion --Ryan Delaney talk 02:07, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Notability is a deletion criterion as indicated here: WP:N. Mh29255 (talk) 02:24, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * What? Notability is the primary criterion for deletion. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 02:30, 28 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep. It's a street / geography based article so notability can be inferred from the context of the article.  Certainly some among the 842 mentions in the New York Times there is substantial enough coverage to establish notability.  I don't agree with the premise of the essay on street notability, cited by the primary author of the essay.Wikidemo (talk) 02:20, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Article has been cleaned up. This is a notable street on the historic Lower East Side of Manhattan, one of about 200-odd articles on streets in the new York City borough of Manhattan, including more than a dozen other articles about streets on the Lower East Side. Alansohn (talk) 04:32, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Alansohn --- what, are you going to nominate Division Street next? --- tqbf  06:23, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep the cleaned-up version, which adequately asserts notability. JamesMLane t c 10:29, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. as per Wikidemo cheers,  Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:09, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per Grutness. I know the area, and it is not notable in any sense of the word. This is a side street. Most of the sites cited are actually not on Division Street (for example, Eldridge Street Synagogue, Seward Park (Manhattan), and Confucius Plaza are off Division Street). The other sites are just plainly not notable - no links or would-be red links. Sorry, folks, this does not cut WP:50k, the most revelant guildline/essay. Possibly redirect to Lower East Side. Bearian (talk) 19:41, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * WP:50K implies that there are only 30 keepably-notable streets in Manhattan. I'm only in Manhattan a few days a year and I feel like I can name more Manhattan streets than that. --- tqbf  01:14, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Obviously, with very important cities, such as Manhattan and London, the ratio is probably more like 1 street per 20,000 persons. Bearian&#39;sBooties (talk) 23:08, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - Verifiability and notability are demonstrated per Alansohn - further sources are needed to strengthen that, though. "WP:50k" is an invalid deletion argument since it's an essay without supporting consensus (not a guideline, let alone policy) that attempts an instruction creep (see WP:BURO) and imposes unnecessarily arbitrary limits (see WP:NOTPAPER). Dl2000 (talk) 23:11, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions.   -- --  pb30 < talk > 06:54, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Notability seems to have been verified. -- Shark face  217  20:23, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. Perhaps I should be more explicit.  According to the essay, "Notable streets and roads can be divided into two types: those which are inherently notable due to some specific historical, geographical, or other quirk, and those which are notable simply by way of their prominence within a city or town."  I don't see how Division Street in Manhattan is either.  True, at sometime in the past, it had a short, 2 or 4 block portion, of the 2nd Ave. El, but that stretch had a single "subway" stop.  Is the assertion that it is notable because two (or three or four) important buildings are nearby or around the corner?  Or that a public transit system historically ran its length? Currently, no subway, El, or bus lines run down Division Street.  It is a four-block back street, bypassed by the Manhattan Bridge. There are no historical buildings facing or having addresses on Division Street. There have, as far as I can ever tell, never been a book, or even New York Times article about this street. No notable person has ever lived on this street. I'm confused as to why other editors could be even more of an inclusionist than I am.  Is there a project to list every named street in Manhattan?  Please, tell me so I don't continue to make a fool of myself. Bearian&#39;sBooties (talk) 18:48, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
 * A historic transit route should provide the same level of notability as a current one, if any. &mdash; brighterorange  (talk) 00:58, 2 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Strong Delete This article doesn't even attempt to claim it's notable. It's nothing but a description of where it's at and what's located on it. Sumoeagle179 (talk) 21:52, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Compare to Broad Street (Manhattan), which lacks any real assertion of notability but is clearly notable, or Nassau Street (Manhattan), which is riddled with notability assertions. If one wanted to (please don't), one could consult the NYTimes archive to uncover Division's role in the wedding dress industry (1960), the efforts to straighten it (1933), or the various people found dead along it. I get that Division isn't Wall or Madison Ave., but how does it improve WP to lose this content? --- tqbf  01:32, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep All verifiable (and some of it is verified) and historic street in arguably the most important city in the world. --Oakshade (talk) 21:40, 1 January 2008 (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.