Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of streets in Paris, France in alphabetical order


 * 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 of the debate was delete (13 delete, 5 keep, 1 transwiki/delete, 1 delete sublists/keep main list). Mind matrix  19:53, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

List of streets in Paris, France in alphabetical order
Violates WP:NOT a directory and a list of internal links (and redlinks) at that. Also listcruft. This nomination also includes all 26 pages listed on this page unless anyone objects and thinks they should be listed seperately. Also this is a recreation of Paris streets-list which was deleted. Delete Gateman1997 18:27, 21 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete ou Effacement. This kind of anorak tendency is not for these parts. doktorb | words 19:45, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep This is part of the Portal:Paris project. These lists are a useful way of finding information.  Nobody is saying that every entry is going to be turned into a blue link but the important streets will (and should) have their own entries. Even the red links have some value as a data source.  The of lists itself is a clear keep as method of organisation.  The sublist commencing with Z for example is now complete.  Seeing as this reorganisation has only happened over the last couple of days I suggest giving it some time to see how it works out before deleting it.  Also, its not really correct to say that this is a recreation of Paris streets-list - it's a reorganisation which is proposed on that Afd talk page and to which nobody objected.  And finally I disagree that this violates WP:NOT a directory - that is using directory in quite a different sense.   Dl yo ns 493   Ta lk  00:25, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
 * How is a giant list of every city street in Paris useful? It sets a very bad precedent, and violates Wikipedia policy. Gateman1997 00:30, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Edit conflict - I hadn't finished commenting above before you replied.    Dl yo ns 493   Ta lk   00:37, 22 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep per comments above. Nom is misleading- this was created based on the discussion in the other AfD. The lists fits with Paris:Portal project and is comparable to other street lists at wikipedia such as List of streets and roads in Hong Kong. -- JJay 02:37, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
 * How is the nom misleading? That list violates two provisions of WP:NOT. As for the Hong Kong list it at least is limited to major roads. This Paris list has EVERY road in the city. I suppose you'd be for keeping List of streets in El Centro California? Because that would have as much right to be here if this drivel is kept.Gateman1997 03:36, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I fail to see why you have to use terms like listcruft or drivel. The editors here have not used derogatory slang for lists you originated such as Special:Undelete/List_of_Caucasian_Americans rapidly recreated by you as Special:Undelete/List_of_White_Americans. I assume those were good, valid lists- just like this Paris list. -- JJay 04:03, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Listcruft is not derogatory but an accepted term for extraneous lists :| Gateman1997 04:26, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, like the lists you usually submit. -- JJay 04:02, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
 * My my someone has forgotten WP:CIV.Gateman1997 04:13, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I learned it all from you. -- JJay 14:54, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Comment I think there's a danger of confusing two separate issues here - the question of the size of these lists/their possibly unencyclopedaic content and the separate question of how to organise a list of streets. Most of the negartive comment above seem to be driven by an understandable wish not to have large lists of unencyclopedaic streets. I suggest the way to achieve that is open to any editor - just go into a list and delete some/all of the entries. Other editors can later recreate articles from scratch for any streets that are notable enough. Alternatively, we can leave some/all the red links as an encouragement for people to turn the important ones blue and that was my motivation for reformatting the original list. There seem to be only about 20 live street links which is too few for a major city like Paris - we should try to encourage creation of others. I think is useful to have the structure of a master list and sublists and I feel it would be a pity to remove that - that would be the result of this Afd as currently formulated. Dl yo ns 493  Ta lk   Dlyons493 08:58, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Paris is a mega important city. Golfcam 03:13, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong delete. Very unencyclopedic. The Paris article may have link to external, professionally maintained list of the streets but having it here has almost no value. (I am of the same opinion for List of streets and roads in Hong Kong.) Pavel Vozenilek 03:31, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong delete per nomination. Not every street is notable, even in Paris. The Portal:Paris project does not override the WP:NOT policy. --Metropolitan90 04:04, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete List is much too granular. Violates WP:NOT per above. (ESkog)(Talk) 07:10, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep as per JJay, if one city is good enough to have a list of streets, so's another. Jcuk 08:04, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete. Perfect example of a collection of indiscriminate information. And the comparison between this list and the list of roads in Hong Kong is utterly pointless; the Hong Kong list has a) discrimination and b) some actual writing, which this doesn't. What is it with listcrufters and making irrelevant comparisons? --Last Malthusian 12:18, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Another pointless comparison- Hong Kong list created Nov 1, 2004, Paris list created December 2005. That left a bit more of a margin for writing. Oh, and the HK list's discrimination is that it is incomplete, I assume once completed it gets deleted-- JJay 12:41, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
 * No, once it becomes an indiscriminate collection of information it gets reverted. I don't think they're heading in that direction, given the "Here is a partial list" disclaimer. It's incomplete because they haven't included every single notable street, not because they haven't included every single back alley and cul-de-sac. And if this list is unfinished, then as I've said time and again, it can be worked on somewhere else and recreated when it doesn't contravene WP:NOT, at which point it won't be eligible for speedy deletion. Moreover, the Hong Kong article never looked like this - check the history. P.S. What's the verification for this? The back of the Paris A-Z? --Last Malthusian 12:51, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, verifiability is a major concern. Imagine the havoc that could result if a non-existent street snuck on to one of these lists. Therefore, I guess we should set up a project to source all our road lists such as List_of_roads_and_expressways_in_Singapore, List of Nova Scotia provincial highways, List of numbered routes in Massachusetts. I prefer individual footnotes for each street, but am open to suggestions. The project could run for some time, though, given that there are at least 75 more of these lists Category:Lists of roads. Of course, the better route might be a blanket nom on AfD, particularly if maps such as Paris A-Z are the only available source. -- JJay 02:13, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Comment I've now created Rue de l'Abbaye - a notable street. And deleted Chemin de l'Abbaye- a non-notable one. As AFAK says we want to end up with a list of notable streets - I think the main disagreement is on the best way to achieve this.
 * Strong delete, batter creator over the head with What Wikipedia is not, repeatedly. The Hong Kong list is discriminate, as it is only the major roads. If you really need this pap, put it in someones user space.  Proto t c 13:39, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
 * And the Paris Portal itself needs some serious pruning, as it reads like a tourist guide at the moment. Proto t c 13:44, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete I would support a merge to List of notable streets in Paris for instance, pruning the list heavily. Normally one assumes that submitters know that "List of x" = "List of notable x", but appears not to be the case here. I generally support deleting all pages where more than 10% of links are redlinks. AKAF 13:52, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - Sorry guys, but, as it is, it must go, as it lacks any context. Had I known it would make such a fuss I wouldn't have uploaded it in the first place - true that that kind of data is not easy to come by (and it was a lot of work to compile) but I had second thoughts (Encyclopaedic?) almost right after I saw it in place, and tended to agree with its (almost immediate) nomination for deletion. By the way, this list is in no way "part of" the Portal:Paris project - I uploaded this on a completely different whim. There is still much work to do on the Portal:Paris page so if you would like turn your attention there and take this "data" to a personal page to fill it out somewhat (all those redlinks!) at a more liesurely pace, maybe we can do something with it later. Thanks all the same and cheers. And happy holidays! ThePromenader 18:32, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete It's unencyclopedic to have these useless lists of unnotable streets - it just slows down access to notable ones. Link to notable street articles in a 'see also' of the Paris article or one 'streets of Paris' page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scott Wilson (talk • contribs)

Comment - You know what rings a bell for me? The category "Streets of Paris". If every street in Paris had an article with a "Category:Streets of Paris" tag at the bottom of it, the "Streets of Paris" category page would end up looking like the list of streets. And in alphabetical order to boot. That way the list wouldn't be an article in itself. Articles on every Paris street - WikiProject? The list of streets as it is could be a Talk page "to do" list. Just a thought. ThePromenader 22:37, 23 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Have a look at Rue de l'Abbaye it has Streets and squares of Paris and Île-de-France geography stubs - these already existed. Dl yo ns 493   Ta lk  22:54, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Comment - Paris Streets Wikiproject begun. Cheers! ThePromenader 13:13, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Transwiki to WikiTravel and delete or categoryfy here. Stifle 00:55, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, valid topic and is useful as a merge target. And unlink a lot of the redlinks if that's a problem.  BTW, transwikiing something to WikiTravel is almost never a valid vote because they use a different licence from what Wikipedia uses.  JYolkowski // talk 04:00, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom --Jaranda wat's sup 04:16, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Great, anyone else think that Wikiproject should be deleted lickity split?Gateman1997 19:47, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Comment - Frankly I don't see the use of grouping these two together on a "France" page - the general consensus (and even my own, the creator of this error) was to delete this article in favour of attributing categories as indicated in the Paris Streets project. So for this particular list, to the bit bucket!
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of France-related deletions.
 * Delete the 26 letter sub-lists and keep the main list. Make it match fr:Liste des rues de Paris as closely as possible.  Include all links on the French version, plus any others with an existing article.  Don't list anything else.   --Rob 08:03, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Comment - Egads - I hadn't realised it had spawned sub-pages! (waving sword) ThePromenader 16:52, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete this and all its subpages. The Paris Streets List is back! Pilatus 14:28, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Unencyclopedic. '  I can't click that! (Edits!) 18:03, 2 January 2006 (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.