Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greater Vancouver Bridges

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was merge and redirect. Mackensen (talk) 13:37, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

Greater Vancouver Bridges
Useless. I've merged what little content there was into TransLink (Vancouver). Gwk 02:21, 10 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Merge and Delete, but are you sure TransLink is responsible for every bridge there? Zhatt  02:26, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * "Merge and Delete" is not compatible with the GFDL, as deleting the page history after a merge destroys the contribution history of what was merged into the target article. A redirect is necessary, instead. A &#1080; D &#1103; 01D  TALK  EMAIL  02:35, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, the only thing that linked to that page was TransLink (Vancouver) and I removed the link from that after I merged the content. Would a redirect really be useful, GFDL aside? Gwk 02:47, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirects are cheap. A Wikipedia search for "vancouver bridges" turns up Greater Vancouver Bridges as the first hit, which suggests this redirect would indeed be useful. Since the content has already been merged, this article cannot be deleted outright; it can only be redirected (or kept). A &#1080; D &#1103; 01D  TALK  EMAIL  02:55, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks for enlightening me. I probably should have read Duplicate articles before posting this here. Gwk 03:10, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Glad to be of assistance. This is a pretty common mistake, so don't feel bad. :-) A &#1080; D &#1103; 01D  TALK  EMAIL  03:23, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect, as long as we can just redirect it, I'm in favor of that. As Android said, "redirects are cheap" (and my time isn't :-D) -mysekurity 04:42, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and rename to "List of bridges in Vancouver" or something alike. AFAICT, it's not article, but makes a decent and informative, if short list. Circeus 14:06, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and rename as per Circeus. The list could be expanded to include bridges that are not under the administration of TransLink. Sorry for being so back-and-forth on these sort of things. Zhatt  20:49, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge & redir as above. Radiant_ &gt;|&lt; 14:24, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and rename as per Circeus. I think this is an interesting list and it should include bridges not under the administration of TransLink therefore merging into Translink isn't appropriate. -- Webgeer 18:11, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and rename --SPUI (talk) 22:51, 12 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Comment. Would this page be better as a template to put on all Greater Vancouver Bridges? I think it would be an intresting little project. I'd manage it. &#0149;Zhatt&#0149;  17:48, July 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * Did it. Template:Bridges of Greater Vancouver. This kinda renders this page useless. I might change my vote. (again) &#0149;Zhatt&#0149;  23:10, July 20, 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.