Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New Zealand State Highway 21


 * 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   speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn, no non-Keep votes. The Bushranger One ping only 01:29, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

New Zealand State Highway 21

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Short stretch (6.7 kilometre) of non-notable road. Unreferenced since 2008. Searching for references finds a great number of people and business addresses. Issues with a bridge which got official, and , local  and press  coverage. If notability rests on the bridge, then the article needs to be renamed Narrows Bridge (New Zealand) and restructured accordingly, it is already mentioned at Hamilton, New Zealand. I've looked for for precedents, in particular at WikiProject U.S. Roads/Precedents, and this nomination seems roughly in line with precedent (but the US roads use lots of terms I don't really understand and precedent isn't necessarily consistent). My guess is that this road is only a state highway to aid navigation to Hamilton International Airport (which only has a single international airline with a single international destination). Redirecting to Hamilton International Airport (or somewhere else) may be the best solution. Stuartyeates (talk) 06:55, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. - gadfium  07:34, 14 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep or merge and redirect to Narrows Bridge (New Zealand), but do not delete. I don't see any benefits for Wikipedia in deleting verifiable geographical information. Thanks Stuartyeates for the sources. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 08:31, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep as geographical information. Very difficult for this to be contentious, although if you can show it is a hoax, I'm all ears.  Dennis Brown (talk) 16:28, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Which part of Notability (geography) do you see this as meeting? I don't see it as meeting any. Stuartyeates (talk) 19:29, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * It doesn't pass WP:Notability (geography), it passes WP:Notability (highways), which is the appropriate guideline that says that main level, state maintained, numbered highways are automatically notable. There isn't a section on New Zealand, but using Australia's section as a guide (or any other) makes it pretty clear.  Dennis Brown (talk) 17:56, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * In response to it passes WP:Notability (highways): all I can do is quote the lede for that article which says In a nutshell, highways that are numbered and signed as part of a single, national highway network are generally notable and should have their own articles. It is, however, important to assert each highway's individual notability (historical significance, press coverage, economic importance, etc.) when writing articles. I'm completely failing to find sources for this highway (an nobody else appears to have found any), so the highway's individual notability is failing. Stuartyeates (talk) 19:00, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * In response to using Australia's section as a guide: all I can say is that it's about as far from Australia to New Zealand as from England to Belarus. while the cultures are similar, the geography is completely different and thus the roads are very different; the federal structure of Australia also means that 'national' has quite different implications. Stuartyeates (talk) 19:00, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Reply Further down it states an exception to proofing notability as "...county highway systems that have a state-wide numbering, which are more similar to state or provincial highway systems". In other words, major highways are pretty much considered de facto without any additional proof and this exceeds the standard exception defined in the main header.  It would be nice to have some verification of existence, but most highways don't, and WP:V doesn't require that verification exists, only that it is possible.  It IS important to provide more information for the benefit of Wikipedia, but it isn't *required* in order to be included.  It is a stub.  We have lots of them.  In short, the problems with the article are matters of editing, not a matter of criteria.  State Highways, de facto, are automatically notable, per guidelines and common outcomes, as are smaller highways systems.  I'm at a loss, as this clearly passes the criteria established.  Everything else is an issue for the talk page, not in AFD.  Dennis Brown (talk) 19:14, 15 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep—the government has gone to the trouble to maintain and designate this roadway as a state highway, a status that sets it apart from many other roads. Merging this back to the most appropriate target, the list of other highways in the system would cause size issues, meaning splitting it into its own article is appropriate on WP:SIZE and WP:UNDUE grounds.  Imzadi 1979  →   22:05, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:21, 15 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep -- Though short this is one of about 100 highways maintained by the state (presumably as opposed to local authorities). This means that the state has identified it as notable.  In UK we have articles on many A-class roads - classified county roads.  I do not see this as sigfnificnatly different.  Peterkingiron (talk) 14:32, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I invite you to compare your logic to the examples given at OTHERCRAPEXISTS. Stuartyeates (talk) 18:49, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * There is a large difference between WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS and WP:COMMONOUTCOMES, although it is easy to confuse the two, and take an improper tone in an otherwise civil discussion. Again, WP:Notability (highways) is the applicable guidelines regarding notability here.  I'm eager to hear how it fails to pass the criteria.  Dennis Brown (talk) 18:57, 15 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Withdraw nomination as much as I completely fail to see how this meets WP:Notability (highways), it looks like I'm the only one and I take Dennis Brown civil discussion point. Stuartyeates (talk) 18:22, 16 December 2011 (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.