Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Justin Avenue


 * 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   delete.  Sandstein  05:52, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Justin Avenue

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Cannot find any evidence of notability and the article has not been edited since its creation over a year ago. A residential street that is less than half a mile long (this can be proven by traveling through this street on Google Maps) certainly does not merit a Wikipedia article and it is definitely not named after Justin Bieber or Justin Timberlake. While there is an entrance to the street from an SIR station, that station is meant to serve the entire neighborhood it is named after, not just one particular street. Searching "Justin Avenue" on Google does not come up with anything significant about the street, just real estate and property information. I am also nominating the following related pages because they are also short, residential streets with little to no significance to the area it is in:

Take note that there are other streets around the world that have the same names as the ones in this AfD, so do not mistake them for these if you do a search on their notability. The Legendary Ranger (talk) 23:57, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:02, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 12:22, 22 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete the three nominated and add a fourth. Mere existence is not enough to warrant inclusion, and these fail WP:GNG at this time.  Imzadi 1979  →   22:45, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
 * There are many who would say that mere existence is sufficient for inclusion, as long as it can be documented. •••Life of Riley (T–C) 01:22, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
 * They might, but WP:GNG is the basic guideline we use to determine notability, and that's the normal bar for inclusion around here.  Imzadi 1979  →   02:31, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I think that public roads can pretty much be assumed expected to pass WP:GNG.  There are reasons other than GNG why we don't list more of them.  Unscintillating (talk) 02:58, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
 * No, they are not. Public roads down to the state road level are assumed to pass WP:GNG. County roads and down are not; WP:OUTCOMES for county roads is to merge to by-county lists, but for unnumbered streets, it's WP:GNG or bust. - The Bushranger One ping only 19:47, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
 * WP:OUTCOMES is an essay, and it says, "Please defer to the relevant policy or guideline in case of inconsistency between that page and this one." WP:GNG is a part of WP:N, which says that, "It is a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply."


 * I didn't mean to suggest that passing WP:GNG can be asserted without evidence in some cases, which seems to be the previous point, and I have changed the word from "assumed" to "expected". I meant that for public roads, WP:GNG wp:notability can be expected to exist due to sources including maps.  This says nothing about outcomes.  Unscintillating (talk) 02:26, 28 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment Justin Avenue may have some sourcing with WP:OR, what kind of source is going to document that a street has "a few quiet residential blocks". Also, there is a dead link that has not been marked, have the people that have commented above looked at the sources available in the article before commenting?  Unscintillating (talk) 05:53, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
 * The No Original Research policy may be of interest. - The Bushranger One ping only 19:47, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment There are enough problems in discussing Justin Avenue without three additional deletion discussions here.  Unscintillating (talk) 05:53, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete all: No case for them being notable, and keeping them would open the door to articles on thousands of insignificant streets. p  b  p  13:14, 26 June 2012 (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.