Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Heretaunga Street


 * 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. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) User:Axisixa [talk] [contribs] 23:37, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Heretaunga Street

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:GNG and WP:GEOROAD, article does not have non-trivial coverage. Additionally, its content is limited to trivial information (such as parking shoulders) and an 'importance' section that contains things seem standard and non-notable for a road in a town of Hastings' size. User:Axisixa [talk] [contribs] 22:44, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Withdrawn by nominator - per below. I was under the impression that there would be no sources to add non-trivial coverage and justify notability. User:Axisixa [talk] [contribs] 23:37, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   &#9742;   &#9998;  00:32, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   &#9742;   &#9998;  00:32, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   &#9742;   &#9998;  00:32, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete, it may be one of the main roads in Hastings but there is absolutely no evidence of notability on a wider scale. Does not pass WP:GEOROAD. Ajf773 (talk) 10:30, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete concur with nom, no evidence of notability, no sources at all . MB 04:53, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep First of all, AfD is not clean up. Whether something is unreferenced or an article is poorly written is rather secondary to the issue of notability. Yes, an article should show notability, but if it doesn't, it does not necessarily mean that it's not notable. I hold 's essay "One street per 50,000 people" in high regards. Going by that, Hastings should have articles for one or two of its streets. Which one or ones should it be? I very much suggest that it'll be Heretaunga Street. It's got the pedestrian mall (they aren't really that common in New Zealand). The centre of the town is the point where Heretaunga Street crosses the railway. It's got a number of heritage buildings on it that are registered by Heritage New Zealand (still working on that table). To me, this is a keep, and we should collectively work on it to turn it into something better than the poor article that got nominated for deletion. I'm doing my bit. Maybe the nominator,, and should have another look when I've done more work on it. And join in!  Schwede  66  05:06, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. The main street of one of New Zealand's main provincial urban areas, containing a goodly number of heritage buildings. Did the article nead cleanup? Yes - though Schwede66 has done good work to improve it. Does it need deletion? No. (PS - thanks for the kind words on my essay, Schwede66). Grutness...wha?  02:02, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. As now notability has been established. It does have some POV/OR issues however that need to be addresses in cleanup. Ajf773 (talk) 08:35, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:48, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep as it is clear notability has now been established. AFD is not cleanup. Smartyllama (talk) 12:31, 6 July 2017 (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.