Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of road interchanges in the United States


 * 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 keep. postdlf (talk) 20:29, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

List of road interchanges in the United States

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

On one level I hate to have to nominate this, but when it comes down to it, this is pretty much indiscriminate as it stands. There are probably several thousand of these, at least, if not ten thousand or more, the vast majority of which will never have an article. It's reasonable to have a list of interchanges in an article on a highway, but lumping everything in one big list is just too much. Mangoe (talk) 21:42, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:46, 25 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep There might be more than the ten thousand road intersections in the US that the nominator posits, but no worry! This is a list of NOTABLE road intersections. Lists are typically of notable entities. The existence of this list does not create an assumption of notability for every instance of one road intersecting another. Edison (talk) 23:09, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. If this is limited to bluelinked articles about notable interchanges, it is a legitimate navigational list. --Arxiloxos (talk) 23:14, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep As long as it's contained to major American interchanges and not 1st and Heath in Arthur, Nebraska, we should be good with keeping this as an article. Limited criteria of the major transport junctions in the US is sound.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 00:00, 26 August 2017 (UTC)


 * comment It does not say it is a list of notable interchanges. Mangoe (talk) 00:55, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment The title can be changed to List of notable road interchanges in the United States very easily.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 01:16, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. -- do  ncr  am  03:09, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note:
 * 1. See guideline Categories, lists, and navigation templates which points out that lists and categories are complementary. A list can include pictures and references and text and redlinks which cannot be conveyed by a category.  For this topic, the list-article can include coordinates of the road interchanges which can be viewed on a GeoGroup-linked Google map.  This list was started by populating it from the corresponding category.  It already is proving valuable as it allows readers to find their way to the major intersections (pretty much the ones most famous for congestion) in each state, which was not possible before, because this is now organized by state.  I think whoever created it did a great job to start!  :)
 * 2. It is indeed a list of notable interchanges. We don't need to say "notable" in the title or even in the lede, although it was put into the lede.  Most lists do not.  Notability can be defined differently, according to a consensus of editors at the Talk page of the list, but to start the list-item-notability standard was defined = "topic is Wikipedia-notable as proven by an article existing".  Certainly when more editors see the list and realize it is missing a major interchange that is very notable for its congestion or otherwise, they can add them as redlinks, if they provide sources establishing importance/notability.  I have worked on lots of list articles and this usually works fine.
 * Thanks Mangoe for being civil and pleasant about this, including by your nice note to my talk page, even though you nominated it for deletion. -- do ncr  am  03:09, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
 * P.S. Further, interchanges are IMPORTANT. They can cost hundreds of millions of dollars.  When one is not functioning smoothly, it costs thousands of persons-years per day of wasted time, easily millions of person-years in a year.  These are huge deals, far more important than your average historic site listed on the National Register, say, which I and others have listed out in county-level list-articles.  When an interchange is blocked, it is a catastrophe.  These are important public resources, major public works, worth celebrating/honoring/knowing about. :) -- do  ncr  am  03:14, 26 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Weak keep A list of highway interchanges is not inherently a bad idea. But there are so many interchanges in the US, maintaining this list in a way that constrains its scope to "notable" interchanges would be a hard task. Restricting to "notable" interchanges would basically amount to a dump of the corresponding category, which I believe lacks the context and sense of commonality needed for a good list. If the list is kept, I think it would need new criteria for inclusion, rooted in third-party media coverage and possibly structural (like unique or otherwise noteworthy construction) and traffic attributes. It should correspond well to the category and its pages, but not just be a list of links to our (existing) articles on American interchanges. -happy5214 04:37, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. I agree with Happy5214.  How exactly do we define inclusion on this page?  I don't have an answer for that. –Fredddie™ 11:24, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment: Responding to User:Happy5214 and User:Freddie, your concern that there should be coverage of the more important items in Wikipedia (wanting "context and sense of commonality" rather than a random collection), is a good reason why we want to have the list-article. The category alone is just a random collection without any overall perspective.  The list-article can cover sources which list identify the important interchanges, including redlink ones which need articles, guiding development.  E.g. this AARoads.Com discussion mentions the first stack interchange in the U.S.--the 101-110 interchange in Los Angeles, built during 1949-1953-- and lists a number more that should be covered.  It would be silly to remove the list-article.  "Weak Keep" is meant to express your disapproval for the current state of the article perhaps, in a patronizing way?  As if you are punishing a child?  I actually see no valid reason for you to be "weak" in your support for the page;  it is simply a good thing to have the list-article. -- do  ncr  am  13:41, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
 * No. Not that at all. There has to be some standard for inclusion on the page.  There isn't currently, so I could add every interchange from Interstate 29 in Iowa and it would be fine and good. –Fredddie™ 17:14, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
 * My vote should be read as "I don't have an issue with such a list existing, but I have serious doubts it can be done in a way that satisfies existing policies and guidelines on lists." My original vote was "neutral", so be happy that I'm siding with you. I know I'd prefer "weak keep" to "neutral" if I were in your position. I agree with Fredddie in his concurrence with my insistence on a standard for inclusion. It should be clear that indiscriminate collections of article links are bad, and I think that's the basis of your argument for a real list instead of just the category. But you need to come up with a reason these interchanges should be included in the list, using reliable sources and not simply a personally curated set. And, no, AARoads can't be cited in this list since it's not considered a reliable source here. -happy5214 23:50, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete as it stands. I could see a list of notable interchanges, but not this. As it is, the article has some significant flaws: editorializing about Los Angeles interchanges, limiting this to stack interchanges, etc. --Rschen7754 05:34, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
 * It is a list of notable interchanges. Otherwise what you have are editing concerns, not governing for an AFD.  About Los Angeles, I was trying to work in some context for that section, based on a source, and I agree my writing was awkward, feel free to change.  About it being stack interchanges only, it must have been some other editor adding that sentence, which is inconsistent with the current title of the article and a bit inconsistent with the contents, because there are a couple non-stack entries listed.  I would think the first cloverleaf interchange in the U.S. would be notable and should be included, for example.  Your participation at the Talk page and in editing the article would be welcome. -- do  ncr  am  19:59, 1 September 2017 (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.