Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Interstate 495 (New York City)

Interstate 495 (New York City) was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was KEEP with a reversal of the redirection and a recommendation to reduce the content in Interstate 495. Rossami 22:17, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Listed here by User:Bumm13 after he cut-and-pasted the content to Interstate 495. keep, and revert Interstate 495. - UtherSRG 02:24, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Interstate 495 (New York City) is redundant as there is already an article on Interstate 495, which takes precedence over a route in a particular city. I-495 is not famous like, say, the Capital Beltway in Washington, DC and does not warrant a separate article. Furthermore, Interstate 495 was nothing more than a disambiguation page with city article links rather than actual links to separate articles using the I-495 designation, which isn't appropriate usage for a disambiguation page. -- Bumm13 02:45, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Properly it should redirect to Long Island Expressway, not vice versa, since the LIE is by far the more common name for the highway. -- Decumanus 02:45, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * This is one example of what had been a few irregularly named articles on Interstate highways. The only other currently remaining is Capital Beltway, which is also an Interstate 495. I made a proposal at Talk:Capital Beltway which has garnered zero response so far. I implemented it for the other less-well-known highways. Bumm13 is quite correct that unlike all of the other three-digit Interstate articles, I-495 was a disambiguation page. I suggest 1) that Interstate 495 (New York City) be moved to Long Island Expressway; 2) that the I-495 article contain only bare minimum of details on both the LIE and the Capital Beltway with links to both articles for more detailed information; and 3) that neither the LIE or Capital Beltway be included in Category:U.S. Interstate Highway system (it just messes up the symmetry of the category listing). older &ne; wiser 03:26, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * I think the LIE rename is a good choice in this case. I'm not sure about all the other recommendations, except that I also agree that Capital Beltway not get sole possession of the name.  I think we're facing an ambiguity created by the US government, rather than one that we made. Geogre 12:37, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Note: There are also stretches of "I-495" interstate in Delaware, Massachusetts and Maine. - Centrx 19:11, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Note: all of the various stretches of I-495 are already listed on the Interstate 495 article. older &ne; wiser 20:50, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Note: Only because that article was changed from a disambiguation page, including a cut-and-paste move from I-495 (NYC). - UtherSRG 21:12, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Note: No, actually they were all already listed there--otherwise it wouldn't have been much use as a disambiguation page. Bumm13 expanded it (although I agree the cut-n-paste from I-495 (NYC) was inappropriate. older &ne; wiser 21:22, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.