Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kreuz Duisburg-Süd


 * 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. -- RoySmith (talk) 02:14, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Kreuz Duisburg-Süd

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Yet another in a list of unremarkable German highway interchanges. There is no claim to notability, and there is no precedent for taking all such interchanges as notable by default. Mangoe (talk) 03:14, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2016 January 4.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 03:24, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. North America1000 07:18, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. North America1000 07:18, 4 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete—as written, this fails the General Notability Guideline, as it does not display "significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject".  Imzadi 1979  →  13:17, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
 * delete another interchange that fails WP:GNG. These nominations should have been grouped together. LibStar (talk) 15:32, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. As all Autobahn interchanges are named, there cannot be any special presumption of notability as there would be for named interchanges in other countries, and there is no evidence of notability otherwise as well. - The Bushranger One ping only 09:37, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Bundesautobahn_524 with option to merge None of the above !votes have made an argument for deletion.  As per WP:N, article content does not determine notability.  Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.  Further, arguments for deletion based on non-notability must also show (as per the policy WP:PRESERVE and the policy WP:ATD) that the topic is not useful as a redirect.  It is only necessary to look at the What links here to determine that this topic is useful.  Since this Kreuz was completed in late 2014, any new information on the topic can be added at the target of the redirect for now.  Unscintillating (talk) 03:31, 11 January 2016 (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.