Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Highland Avenue 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 no consensus. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  10:57, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

Highland Avenue Bridge

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This article on a non-notable subject only cites two sources, both of which only mention the subject in passing. The Rappold source actually focuses on a now-demolished bridge at the same location as the subject of this article. The Mead & Hunt source isn't about the subject of this article; it's an inspection report for a dam that's a mile upstream.

I found one additional source that could strengthen this article: Jeffrey Hess's Historic Highway Bridges in Wisconsin, which is a 1986 state Department of Transportation report on preserving old bridges. The only other sources I could find were government records of routine safety inspections (which exist for practically every bridge and dam) and a couple books for kayakers that mention the bridge as a landmark. Even if this article utilized Hess's report as a source, there isn't wide enough coverage at this time for the bridge to meet the "significant coverage" aspect of the general notability guideline. CoatGuy (talk) 22:52, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
 * My thought is that this and Columbia Mill probably aren't notable enough for their own articles, but could be included elsewhere in the encyclopaedia. I'm just not sure where. SportingFlyer  T · C  15:31, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Possibly Columbia Historic District (Cedarburg, Wisconsin)? The bridge and the mill are both in the immediate area, though neither is technically a contributing property to the NRHP listing. Including this information on that page might help with some of that page's issues as well; it relies almost entirely on one source. CoatGuy (talk) 15:59, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Agree it's not a 100% match, but it seems the best match at this point. These articles seem to be a classic case of "the information's good, but there's not enough for a stand-alone." SportingFlyer  T · C  16:12, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wisconsin-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:53, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:53, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * delete. I'm not seeing many reliable sources about this (that give significant coverage, etc). Could be possibly merged into Columbia Historic District (Cedarburg, Wisconsin), although take note that this isn't a contributing property. JackFromWisconsin (talk &#124; contribs) 03:29, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Merge (partial) to Cedar Creek (Wisconsin), adding some details from this article to that list.Djflem (talk) 05:35, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
 * keep. Historic Highway Bridges in Wisconsin Has good coverage of this bridge — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ghaynes19 (talk • contribs) 17:27, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 19:34, 7 May 2021 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Aseleste  (t, e &#124; c, l) 02:52, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
 * keep As per Ghaynes19 seems to have some coverage to satisfy GNG. Peneplavím (talk) 03:53, 22 May 2021 (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.