Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/G47 Nenjiang–Dandong Expressway


 * 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. Guerillero Parlez Moi 09:33, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

G47 Nenjiang–Dandong Expressway

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

Full of creator's own original researches and misreading of sources, all available sources don't show anything where "G47" and/or the expressway name mentioned. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 07:15, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and China. Shellwood (talk) 07:28, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:V, I searched for "G47" and the two Chinese names on Baidu and did not found no news articles or even government press releases discussing it. Jumpytoo Talk 05:41, 2 September 2022 (UTC) Changing vote to Delete the redirect only, while keeping the G4512 article which is a verifiable expressway. Jumpytoo Talk 05:32, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * There's literally a map of the route on the Baike page??
 * Your allegations are potentially fabricated. Dennis Dartman (talk) 14:51, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Baidu Baike is an open wiki. Anyone can upload anything onto there, so it is user-generated content and not reliable, unless you can show where the image originally came from. Regardless, it is so small I can't pull out any useful information about it. The third source, while also WP:UGC and unreliable, claims (Google translated): Due to the few records of G47 on the Internet Therefore, it is believed that G47 does not exist. Jumpytoo Talk 18:28, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Originally I was just going to say delete for much of the same reasons as above, but now in addition to that I'm also going to ask for User:Dennis Dartman to be banned indefinitely from Wikipedia without the possibility of parole. From the looks of their editing behavior, they are a WP:SPA who is only here to negatively contribute to the encyclopedia by means of disruptive editing. This article is a WP:HOAX with no factual basis. G47 does not exist. George Huntley (talk) 15:03, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * No? I didn't create my account just to make this article? And I made this article because it does exist, Chinese and American maps depict it, signs for it have been erected, etc.?
 * Honestly, from the looks of your contributions, it looks like you're ironically more of a single-purpose account, considering that all of your edits up until now have been about Egg Fu Yong (or other recipes or spelling variants thereof). Dennis Dartman (talk) 15:14, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment. This sounds more like the name of a highway project and not a current highway. I am not sure it meets GNG. Plenty of contract bidding disclosures from the local government and there is one article about the building process in Google Scholar . There is even one article mentioning its code name S47 (not G47) from a 2011 report. However, the highway between Nengjiang and Baicheng, the only built part of this project, is now coded as G4512, which means it now part of the G45 and not going all the way to Dandong as originally planned. --Skyfiler (talk) 23:41, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment: Do you know how the NTHS works? S stands for 省, which means "province" in Chinese. G stands for 国, which means "country" in Chinese. They are akin to state routes and interstate highways respectively in America.
 * Now, if you look at the actual route of the expressway, you will see that Nenjiang, G47's northern terminus, is in Heilongjiang province, and that Dandong, G47's southern terminus, is in Liaoning province. Furthermore, Jilin province is in the middle. Unlike often in the United States, the Chinese practice is typically for each province to maintain its own network of S-class expressways, and numbers are rarely, if ever, shared between provinces across boundary lines.
 * Notwithstanding these arguments, I have moved the G47 article to G4512, which did not exist hitherto. Dennis Dartman (talk) 00:40, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, I guess the reason why you were believing that G47 exists, is probably because of the Baidu Maps (百度地图), where it marked G47 on the affected sections just south of Baicheng. In this case:
 * I've reported their typo on numbering, and is waiting for Baidu's response.
 * Due to the Restrictions on geographic data in China, many of the coordinates provided by Mainland Chinese maps providers are not trustful. While this panorama don't directly affect the quality of sources of highway numbering systems, I'm afraid, that Baidu Maps did a very bad god name-based behavior on misrepresenting of local govt's plans.
 * Baidu Maps started providing routes in other countries since (IIRC) 2018, by just forking OpenStreetMap's datas with largely censored sensetive names, and even without attributions about OSM's copyrights (I believe that attributions are also required by ODbL, the license OSM is currently using). Also after Pelosi's visit to Taiwan, they drew a imaginary route between Pingtan and Hsinchu on their mobile apps, it currently only works for navigations so you couldn't saw it easily, mean that you could plan your navigation routes to e.g. Taipei 101 (better try it, you could see that imaginary route "跨海大桥（拟建设）" as a blue dotted line).
 * Due to those problem, I would propose via WP:RSN when I have time, to treat Baidu Maps' quality as same level of Baidu Baike. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:09, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
 * If you're under the impression that Baidu's treating the Taiwan Strait bridge as an already-built structure, I'm sure you'd be happy to know that "拟建设" means "to be built" or "under planning"!
 * But from my personal experience both inside and outside of Mainland China, I'd have to agree that Baidu (or other domestic mapping services, like Gaode Ditu/Amap) are many times better than anything Google has to offer, which shouldn't exactly be too surprising considering the restrictions on geographic data in China. Dennis Dartman (talk) 22:56, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
 * It should also be mentioned that G47 has appeared on many different mapping services, including Google Maps. Dennis Dartman (talk) 23:03, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
 * These are also typos as concerned by OpenStreetMap Wiki, see Copyright Easter Eggs. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 05:17, 6 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Comment: Suppose it's built by individual provinces concurrently, then the section between Benxi and Dandong should be part of this highway. However this section is called G1113 by now . I am not sure if there is any in depth coverage independent of the local government (local government web site and newspaper are not independent sources) on this project. --Skyfiler (talk) 15:48, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 15:11, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment: since I've re-themed the G47 article to G4512, do you still endorse this deletion discussion (i.e. that G4512 does not satisfy the Wikipedia inclusion requisites either)? Dennis Dartman (talk) 22:51, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
 * No need to, G4512 is an existing road, through that article lacks some information and sources. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 22:54, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep I came in with the intention of closing this but I see it has just been relisted. This is no longer the same article as the one that was nominated for deletion. Nominator has withdrawn and the only active delete !vote is from an indef blocked user.  Satellizer el Bridget (Talk)  05:02, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
 * as this article has been re-written on a fairly high level, to reflect the actual numbered road. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 10:05, 12 September 2022 (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.