Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of streets in Manchester


 * 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   no consensus. Courcelles 03:45, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

List of streets in Manchester

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

This list is unsuitable for Wikipedia. As it stands, it is obviously incomplete, and probably always will be. There are, certainly, notable streets in Manchester, but this would be better served as a category. Currently, it's a violation of WP:OR, as it's only a "selection" based on the author's preference.  Aiken   &#9835;   14:02, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOTDIR. While categories and lists are not mutually exclusive, this is essentially a directory, and may have OR issues. --Claritas § 16:35, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Clear inclusion criteria for a list. Lists and categories go hand-in-hand, per WP:CLN. The article is in a terrible state, but nothing that couldn't be fixed by normal editing (WP:BEFORE#10 - "If the article can be fixed through normal editing, then it is not a good candidate for AfD"). Also part of a bigger scheme of similar articles.  Lugnuts  (talk) 16:56, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Erm, it cannot be fixed - it would violate WP:NOTDIR if it included every single street - and there must be thousands, most of which are not at all notable. And the "scheme" isn't big. Note, for example, there is no List of streets in London which has many more notable streets. Individual streets are notable, but streets as a whole in Manchester are not. Hence it fails WP:N, WP:NOTDIR, WP:OR to name a few. Are you going to fix this article?  Aiken   &#9835;   17:04, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, just done so. Are you going to stop hounding people who disagree with your deletionism mantra?  Lugnuts  (talk) 17:38, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * You haven't fixed it. It still violates WP:OR, WP:V, WP:NOT etc. And I am not a deletionist. Despite your resort to name-calling, I simply think this "article" has no place on Wikipedia, due to its violation of so many policies and guidelines. Doesn't make me a deletionist, anymore than it makes you an inclusionist.  Aiken   &#9835;   18:55, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep, obviously. Bizarre nomination; this is clearly an appropriate use for a list. – iride  scent  17:28, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * There's nothing clear about it at all. It violates WP:NOTDIR and WP:N, so hardly "bizarre" either.  Aiken   &#9835;   17:33, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * If it listed every street in Manchester, it would violate WP:NOTDIR. It doesn't, and it doesn't. A list of significant streets, significant buildings etc is a perfectly acceptable use of the list format; replacing it with a category would show only those streets which already have articles, while the purpose of a list is also to show those which should have articles. There are many lists, up to and including FL-level lists, which include huge numbers of redlinks or currently unlinked entries, or which list only an arbitrarily-chosen subset of a much larger group—see List of United States Air Force Academy alumni, List of HIV-positive people, Listed buildings in Runcorn, List of tributaries of Larrys Creek, List of places of worship in Brighton and Hove or List of snow events in Florida, for example. – iride  scent  17:57, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Who says a street is "significant"? It violates WP:OR and always will.  Aiken   &#9835;   21:52, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Umm this makes no sense to me. If a street or road has an Article, that is able to survive the scrutiny of other editors, then consensus says "it is significant". Besides, we are not discussing the significance of each individual road Article. This discussion was about the List. If you wish to 'go down that road' please do so at Notability (streets, roads, and highways) Exit2DOS • Ctrl • Alt • Del 18:00, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * It makes no sense that we should have a list for streets. Streets, as I already explained, can be notable on their own. Manchester has many notable streets, as do most cities. However, streets in general are not notable. It is the exception, rather than the rule that they are noteworthy. Unlike, say, Grade I listed buildings, not every one is of importance to have an article of. One could argue that, if that is the case, we can list the streets regardless. But that would be violating WP:NOT. However, listing only a selection, even if they are only the "notable" ones would still violate WP:OR, because it is not up to Wikipedians to decide if something is notable - that is done by sources. Which brings me to the point: there are no sources that state Manchester's streets are notable, in general. As mentioned, listed buildings are notable. Monarchs are notable. Countries are notable. Lots of things are. But streets are not. As this is the case, a category will suffice. Otherwise, we are keeping a list of a non-notable concept (individual streets), that lack any kind of sources and is pure original research for which streets get included.  Aiken   &#9835;   18:44, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * The examples you have given are all worthy of being a list, as the topics they represent are notable (a place, listed buildings, places of worship, etc). Streets are generally not notable - they are run-of-the-nill things, encountered every single day. The notable ones are individually notable and don't make any sense in an incomplete list, especially one where they have been handpicked, without any apparent criteria. The article is currently a handpicked selection, which we should not do - all notable examples should be included - and if every street was listed, it would be a vio of WP:NOTDIR. This list serves no purpose - it doesn't do what it says it does, and violates policies in order to do it.  Aiken   &#9835;   22:04, 8 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:53, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:53, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:53, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. As it stands, this article doesn't make sense, because there's no logic to having an arbitrary "selection" of streets. However, a list of notable streets in Manchester would make more sense. The only question is whether it's worth having this on top of a category. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 20:57, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I thought along the same lines, and I don't believe a list is worth it.  Aiken   &#9835;   21:52, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * EXPANDED There, that wasn't too difficult. I've started work on an expansion to this, adding a table, a few refs. Now this has more info than could possibly be gleaned from looking at a category.  Lugnuts  (talk) 11:24, 10 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete. Indiscriminate list. Seriously inappropriate. Cindamuse (talk) 06:26, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - the are all surface roads, they are all in Manchester, thus discrimination is made. IMO it should be trimmed to Notable streets, as a road gains itself an article, then it can be added to the list. May I suggest that it move to a format more like List of roads in Baltimore County, Maryland or List of county routes in Humboldt County, Iowa (both of which have survived similar, poorly thought out, nominations). Exit2DOS • Ctrl • Alt • Del 18:13, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Not at all poorly thought out. On the contrary, I give solid reasons why this article should not exist. You, on the other hand, have not shown how such a concept is notable (it isn't) and instead resorted to attacking the nomination, and give a wishywashy "other stuff exists, so it's all good" non-argument. When we keep non-notable collections of indiscriminate information, like lists of non-notable streets, we begin a slippery slope towards keeping lists of endless, pointless things about everything. What's next, List of walls in Manchester, List of trees in Manchester, List of atoms in Manchester? We are not a compendium of everything that ever existed. Streets, non-notable ones, are everyday things and do not need documenting on Wikipedia, unless they are a notable concept/idea. They are not.  Aiken   &#9835;   18:33, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Nowhere have I suggested that the List should survive because something else does. I suggested that it move to a more informative format, such as the ones I suggested. I acknowledge that every Article in WP must stand on their own individual merits, WP:N with Citations included. But how each of us Find that Article, may be different. Exit2DOS • Ctrl • Alt • Del 20:39, 9 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete just a made up list better covered by Category:Streets in Manchester. MilborneOne (talk) 19:51, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * WP:CLN is your friend.  Lugnuts  (talk) 11:03, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
 * HOW is it "better covered" by a Cat? A Cat cannot make the link between the road and what Notable locations are on it. Exit2DOS • Ctrl • Alt • Del 17:35, 10 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete. If this article were to be kept, Wikipedia could end up with a whole load of "List of streets in city/town/village" in the United Kingdom. It should be deleted, or at least renamed as "List of notable streets in Manchester" .--HLE (talk) 21:58, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
 * And what's wrong with that? There are already other street list articles. The word "notable" shouldn't be used in an article title, as it's implied by being on WP in the first place.  Lugnuts  (talk) 08:02, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
 * We already do, as a matter of fact 2 Articles. It's just that they are called Motorways on that side of the pond. see List of motorways in the United Kingdom & Lists of roads in the United Kingdom, should we not try to make the listing whole and complete? Exit2DOS • Ctrl • Alt • Del 12:06, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Motorways are probably always notable. The other list article you mention is for notable A-roads, which are essentially the next major road level after motorways. This article is not listing A roads so it cannot be compared.  Aiken   &#9835;   12:40, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Just because they are a different Class of road makes no difference. They are roads, in a predefined area. They could be Dirt Roads for all that matters. Their individual notability is explained on their own page. They can be listed togeather. Exit2DOS • Ctrl • Alt • Del 09:28, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * It makes a massive difference. Motorways, in my guess, are always going to be notable, simply because of their nature of all being built in the past 60 years, so will have ample coverage and notability. Dirt tracks probably won't. Ordinary streets are, generally, not notable. I'm sure you can agree on this. Most of the millions of streets in the world contain ordinary houses, with ordinary people living in them. Nothing notable. There are exceptions, but as notable streets in x are the exception, it becomes difficult to define criteria for a list: example, do we include red links when we have no idea if a street is notable or not? Who gets to decide? Where is Manchester anyway? Is it the City, the centre, or the district? This list just has no hope to become anything useful.  Aiken   &#9835;   13:31, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Further comment. All the "List of streets in X" pages should be deleted, not just this particular page. Otherwise we may as well copy a list of all the streets from the Manchester Street AZ Atlas, and when that is done do the same for any other city, town and village in the United Kingdom, and beyond. Wikipedia would change from over 3 million to over 4 or 5 million pages. I agree it makes sense to have lists of tallest buildings and structures, films set, mills, and schools in Manchester. But List of streets in Manchester is going too far. What next "List of bus shelters in Manchester" and "List of postboxes in Manchester". Wikipedia is an encyclopedia not a directory.--HLE (talk) 14:21, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd be happy to have a list of streets - if it was determined that streets in X are notable in general. For example, London might be able to claim that. And yet, there is no List of streets in London. Here we are with a list of random streets in Manchester, with no apparent criteria or general notability - might as well have List of houses in Manchester and List of shops in Manchester along with the bus stops and postboxes. I don't understand how this list is so necessary to Wikipedia.  Aiken   &#9835;   14:27, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * HLE, Please take the argument that all List of roads in xxx should be deleted, to Notability (streets, roads, and highways) as it is well beyond the scope of this AFD. We are attempting to gain a consensus about this list, not all lists. Aiken, What does "if it was determined that streets in X are notable in general." mean? Are you saying that ALL the streets in an area must be notable collectivly for there to be a List article? Because if you are I believe you greatly misunderstand the point of a list. Exit2DOS • Ctrl • Alt • Del 09:28, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * It seems it is fine to use street list articles, List of motorways in the United Kingdom, Lists of roads in the United Kingdom, etc. in the argument, even though they are well beyond the scope of this AFD. But if I use them I'm told to take the argument to Notability (streets, roads, and highways). Double standards here.--HLE (talk) 12:59, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * There is nothing on that link to suggest that non-notable concepts, such as streets, should be made into lists. We'll be moving onto bus stops and post boxes before we know it. We're not a compendium of everything that ever existed, only notable things, and we're not the Manchester A-Z.  Aiken   &#9835;   13:26, 13 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep. If we have articles on the streets themselves there is no reason not to have the relevant list articles. Wikipedia includes gazetteer information as a matter of course. MRSC (talk) 10:14, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * But we don't have articles on all the streets, only a select few - a clear vio of WP:NOT.  Aiken   &#9835;   12:40, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * There's potentional for them to be created, making your arguement redundant.  Lugnuts  (talk) 12:47, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Not every street is notable, so there isn't potential (for most of them).  Aiken   &#9835;   12:50, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * It does not matter that ALL the streets are not notable, The point of a List it to group togeather a list of the notable ones, Red Links are encouraged to promote the creation of Articles. Agin, I will point you towards the point of a list. Exit2DOS • Ctrl • Alt • Del 09:28, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm well aware of the purpose of lists, and there is nothing that suggests non-notable concepts (such as streets) should be included on Wikipedia.  Aiken   &#9835;   13:26, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes there is some potential.  Lugnuts  (talk) 13:56, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Don't know why you're using edit summaries like "more fail" - it's quite rude really. And, no, there is no potential for most streets. We're not a compendium of everything that ever existed. Not every street is notable, it's more the exception than the rule - they are run of the mill things, most with ordinary houses with ordinary people living in them. Please stop trying to insist otherwise. I'm not against road articles - far from it - but I am against non-notable ones in list form, and so is policy.  Aiken   &#9835;   14:21, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Please stop trying to insist otherwise. Unlike you? Many of these streets are notable - you are wrong.  Lugnuts  (talk) 18:01, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Many of these streets are notable. I never suggested otherwise. You're suggesting that they all have potential. They don't. And please stop with the obnoxious edit summaries.  Aiken   &#9835;   18:13, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Keep, I think that this is a useful page as it is about every street in Manchester and is not about a single un-notable street. Hamish Griffin (talk) 14:04, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * "...it is about every street in Manchester..." Have you looked at the list? It's a handpicked selection of 65 streets, some which are debatably not even streets (Piccadilly Gardens and Albert Square). There are thousands of streets in Manchester.  Aiken   &#9835;   14:16, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * It could easily be renamed once kept - compare List of streets and squares in Lyon, for example.  Lugnuts  (talk) 17:43, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Keep I think it is better to have such a page than loads of seperate short stubs on inidividual streets. Useful as a reference point. Dr.  Blofeld  10:08, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete or restructure to ensure that only notable streets can be included -- The purpose of a list of this kind is to identify article that are needed whcih will appear in it as redlinks. Some of the streets may need an article, but most will not.  We should not encourage the creation of stub articles on NN streets, but that is what this list would tend to do in its present form.  I do not object to streets called "Square" or "Gardens" in principle.  However (unless the objective is to generate substantive articles) a category does the job much better than a list.  Peterkingiron (talk) 14:34, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep where there is a category, there should in general be a list. A list with material limited to that in articles on notable  Wikipedia  subjects is not indiscriminate, but discriminating, according to WP:N.  The relevant policy is NOT PAPER.  Lists have the particular advantage of providing some information about the material in which they appear, thus facilitating identification and browsing.  Browsing is a key function of an encyclopedia. If the list needs cleaning up and reorganizing, that is not an argument for deletion, but for keeping and fixing.   DGG ( talk ) 21:39, 14 August 2010 (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.