Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kreuz Osnabrück-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. Spartaz Humbug! 00:01, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Kreuz Osnabrück-Süd

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Was de-prodded with the comment, "needs afd". Just another interchange like thousands of others. Each interchange needs to be individually discussed on its own merits as to whether or not it passes GNG. This one clearly does not.  Onel 5969  TT me 13:31, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete—fails to assert notability in line with WP:GNG.  Imzadi 1979  →   21:27, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor Talk! 12:45, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor Talk! 12:45, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: To provide more time as requested.  Sandstein  17:42, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete – not every interchange is notable. sst ✈  03:32, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep: There is no consensus for the deletion of these German Autobahn interchanges articles as a block, and insufficient time allocated by the AfD process for editors to research their GNG individually. See Articles for deletion/Kreuz Oranienburg and Articles for deletion/Kreuz Duisburg. Bahnfrend (talk) 13:09, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   17:42, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
 * delete No claim of notability and no guideline asserting default notability. Mangoe (talk) 03:43, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. WP:RUNOFTHEMILL cloverleaf interchange; all interchanges on Autobahns are named so there is no special presumption of notability, and no evidence of WP:GNG being met. - The Bushranger One ping only 04:04, 9 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.