Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dumez Bridge


 * 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  Nancy  talk  06:19, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Dumez Bridge

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Erk. The tagger could be right, but as a cultural sensitivity thing, I'm really uncomfortable db-spamming Iraqi public works projects. Let's discuss at AfD. 3 admins who are very active in CSD work have all edited the article previously, and none of them tagged it for speedy deletion. There are 3 companies mentioned in this article, and it's certainly possible that the intent was promotional, but none of those 3 companies get more than one sentence of mention. - Dan Dank55 (push to talk) 18:58, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iraq-related deletion discussions.  -- - Dan Dank55 (push to talk) 18:59, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.  -- - Dan Dank55 (push to talk) 18:59, 1 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment - I tagged this db-spam because I saw 2 companies mentioned (I think "Kirkuk Constructive Laboratories" may be a local government oversight, but I'm not sure) and the creator slapped a bio of one of the engineers into WP:BLP today. As it stands the article isn't about the bridge, it's about the bridge construction project; the details given and pictures provided are what you might find in a company press release. And I'm not sure if the bridge is important enough for an article anyway. Do we have notability criteria for bridges? Rd232 talk 20:30, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Here's an essay on inherent/defacto notability, which makes a case that bridges of a certain size have defacto notability, meaning that most editors would presume them to be notable in and of themselves. — LinguistAtLarge • Talk  21:48, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The essay doesn't "make a case", it just makes an assertion, and it's mostly about places people live in (because some people feel bad if they live in a tiny place with a name and they're not allowed to have an article on it). And the essay literally says bridges "of a certain size", which means precisely nothing. Rd232 talk 22:24, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I take the "bridges of a certain size" bit to mean that bridges that carry more people or more lanes of traffic would have more defacto notable than, say, a 10-yard-long bridge on a two lane road that you cross without even knowing it, or a plank thrown across a creek. Presumably, larger or more trafficked bridges would have more inherent notability, because they affect a larger range of people. Again, it's just an essay, so take it with a grain of salt. — LinguistAtLarge • Talk  23:02, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Well that much is surely obvious, isn't it? The issue is where to draw the line. For bridges, I have no idea. Rd232 talk 23:06, 1 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment -- the article may be a poor one, but the solution to that is to tag it for improvement, not to delete it. Peterkingiron (talk) 22:41, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete for now - On one hand, I would lean toward a keep on this one, as in my opinion, a bridge of the size depicted in the photos has some defacto notability (see this essay). On the other hand, we need to rule out the possibility that this might be a hoax as well.  To get a keep out of me, I need to see at least one source for this, if only for verification that it exists. — LinguistAtLarge • Talk  23:09, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Userfy. I was not impressed that Google only gives eight hits for "Dumez Bridge" - and one of those is a clone of my contributions! The pictures look a bit like the Ifraz Bridge (the same in Turkish) but we do need some decent refs. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 03:56, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * That's a different bridge. Notice the shape of the legs. Sarilox (talk) 15:22, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 07:04, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete A 60 meter modern concrete bridge in a city of almost a million people is not notable. I do not know just where the standard should be set, but this is below it. DGG (talk) 13:54, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete As above, a generally bridge isn't a notable structure; especially a modern one. We have millions of them. Greggers (t &bull; c</b>) 09:19, 7 April 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.