Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ruhr Industrial Heritage Trail – Duisburg: Town and Harbour


 * 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. Tone 08:09, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Ruhr Industrial Heritage Trail – Duisburg: Town and Harbour

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A non-notable "theme route" on the Industrial Heritage Trail. A Google search for the name in English produces one hit, which is in Vietnamese. A search for the German name, Duisburg: Stadt und Hafen yields no independent coverage. A template, Template:Ruhr Industrial Heritage Trail lists this as the first of 25 such theme routes, and all the others are redlinks. Largoplazo (talk) 11:36, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:45, 28 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep: please visit the German language version of this page: Route der Industriekultur – Duisburg: Stadt und Hafen. You will see a large number of blue links, and also when you expand the boxes at the bottom, you will see that the German language version of the template mentioned above, Vorlage:Navigationsleiste Route der Industriekultur has no blue links only red links. As the German wikipedia is not for its lack of profligacy when it comes to creating articles, I would suggest time would be better spent improving the article and coping with all those redlinks ratherthan deleting the article. Leutha (talk) 14:25, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
 * A lack of notability can't be fixed with edits. Also, each Wikipedia has its own guidelines and practices. Largoplazo (talk) 14:32, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
 * How true! However as the series of trails have attracted 7.26 million visitors, generated 285 million euros in sales, and created 6,150 jobs in the last twenty years, 20 Jahre Route der Industriekultur these routes are clearly notable. Leutha (talk) 09:41, 29 October 2019 (UTC)


 * It seems odd that you plead for the article to be improved, yet you've now taken, twice so far, to removing a tag signaling an obvious need for improvement, which is to replace all the German with English. Largoplazo (talk) 14:42, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
 * My apologies, I did not realise that you had revert my first removal so quickly, and mistakenly removed it again. Please see talk page, which is the right place for further discussion of this matter.Leutha (talk) 08:22, 29 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment, the article on German WP (here)has a number of books listed which may discuss this trail but although WP is a gazeteer, it is not a tourguide, more is needed. Coolabahapple (talk) 23:20, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
 * A good point: more has been added. Leutha (talk) 09:51, 29 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep The largest inland harbour in the world is not considered notable? Really? If Castlefield is notable this will be. I say will be in the context of present emphatic and also future. Heritage articles have a life history look how Chatham_Dockyard&oldid=8707036 December 2004 has developed into Chatham Dockyard.. this is analogous, and the final structure of this article could be the same but it may take 19 years. --ClemRutter (talk) 10:58, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I changed that from "Oppose" to "Keep", which is the usual language for AFDs. Change it back if you prefer. --Doncram (talk) 04:43, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * The article isn't about the harbor, which is covered at Duisburg Inner Harbour. It's a list of stops on one of many sightseeing "theme routes" (walking tours, I guess) that someone has designed around the trail. The sights on the route are certainly notable, but an arbitrary composition of them into a walking tour would have to meet WP:GNG in its own right. Largoplazo (talk) 11:21, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not quite sure what your problem is? "Someone"???? erm, the trail is part of the Industrial Heritage Trail, which in turn is part of the European Route of Industrial Heritage. As mentioned above: "the series of trails have attracted 7.26 million visitors, generated 285 million euros in sales, and created 6,150 jobs in the last twenty years, 20 Jahre Route der Industriekultur these routes are clearly notable." Not quite sure hwy you have not taken this point into account.Leutha (talk) 23:52, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I understand the Industrial Heritage Trail is notable. It is not the case that every part of a notable thing is automatically independently notable and qualified for a Wikipedia article of its own. See WP:NOTINHERITED. Largoplazo (talk) 11:59, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I think your comment is relevant to the individual sites on each heritage trail, and, indeed, as the page is being developed it would not be relevant to create a page for each individual item: thus for instance the links to Duisburg Canals rather to each individual canal. The trail links otherwise diverse buildings and structures into a trail. However with the different trails, they are cut from the same cloth, or to use another metaphor, they have notability funning through them like the name of a seaside town in a stick of rock.Leutha (talk) 19:36, 5 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep. It's a public trail, we keep these, always.  Every AFD ever about historic trails, about bicycle trails along old railroad right-of-ways, etc., about bridges converted to pedestrian usage, etc. are all closed "Keep", because they are major public attractions and newsworthy.  I think there's an essay, wp:ITSAPUBLICATTRACTION (maybe i contributed to that).  Trails take decades to develop and continue to develop more over time, it is fair to expect deep coverage about government decisions to set aside trailspace and fund development over the years, etc.  I am betting you and I don't know how to search properly to find the internet coverage about it in German. Sure this can be tagged for better development, and I don't understand the relationship between it and the Industrial Heritage Trail which should be clarified, but this is a significant trail on its own, and I can't argue about merging it vs. splitting it.  So Keep and leave to informed editors later if it makes sense to merge it into the article about the Industrial Heritage Trail.  Here, clearly, the English-language Wikipedia coverage is poor and needs to be developed, but deleting stuff just to recreate it later (because we do know it is obviously a notable topic), goes against Wikipedia guidelines. --Doncram (talk) 04:43, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * You have it backwards. We don't evaluate notability based on our assumption that something is worthy of coverage. That would be the exact opposite of WP:GNG. We look for coverage that exists. As far as knowing how to search properly is concerned, I've been running online searches for over 20 years. I'm sure I don't need to take special training to "properly" execute a Google search for the name of this trail in both English and German.
 * Looking through the German Wikipedia article, I see no indication that this is a constructed trail. Setting aside that six out of the nine paragraphs in that article aren't even about the trail, the three paragraphs that do cover it say nothing that would lead to suspect the public had any interest in its arrangement, which isn't even covered in the article. It appears to be one of a number of convenient walking tours that a committee designed to make it easy to see a number of the notable sights around the harbor. I can't imagine why that would have received any external coverage. Largoplazo (talk) 11:56, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Well it appears to be an organized trail. And editor Leutha opened that template in 2010 and has been editing it in the last few days.  Like walking tours in lots of places, the route may go along regular streets and sidewalks.  The trail is recommended in this tourist website: 25 best things Duisberg Germany.  I agree it would help to locate a trail map, say, but I do not understand German well enough to find such.  There is this Komoot website on hiking routes near Duisberg, which may be more nature-oriented than an organized trail through an industrial area. --Doncram (talk) 23:28, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: There is a strong desire to Keep this article, but we still need to see the 2-3 explicit diffs to the WP:RS that nails GNG for this. Remember, this article is about the "themed route", and not the towns or ports per se, so we need to see that this section of the "themed route" is inherently notable (otherwise, the logical option is to merge into the Industrial Heritage Trail article).

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Britishfinance (talk) 20:27, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep We always keep public trails in WP. Major public attractions are notable. The article should be improved and expanded with additional sources. Perhaps another heading for Duisburg Harbour is the Worlds biggest inland port. Wm335td (talk) 21:26, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
 * We always keep public trails because we just decided randomly to declare them inherently notable? Where's the guideline reflecting that? Or we "always" keep them insofar as the ones you've seen discussed were individually found to meet WP:GNG? But, then, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Or, do you actually know that we "always" do? Evidence, in that case?
 * Referring to it as a major public attraction is begging the question. If it has little coverage, then how is it a major attraction? Largoplazo (talk) 22:14, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
 * It now has eight references, more than the additional 2-3 requested by Britishfinance. Thus we must conclude that it does have much more than little coverage. Leutha (talk) 18:31, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , it will help the AfD close efficiently if you can paste diffs of the 3 main refs that you think confirm GNG on this AfD page. thanks. Britishfinance (talk) 18:32, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: This needs more discussion of the actual sources and fewer assertions in the vein of "we always keep X".

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   12:33, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment, the Dutch-language reference in the article is about the Ruhr Industrial Heritage Trail in general, not about the Duisburg section in particular. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:52, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Response, however the source does specifically refer to this section to provide context for a more general remark.Leutha (talk) 15:22, 20 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep. Passes WP:SIGCOV. The route has been a prominent subject in multiple peer reviewed journal articles. See:
 * Hope this helps.4meter4 (talk) 01:54, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Hope this helps.4meter4 (talk) 01:54, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Hope this helps.4meter4 (talk) 01:54, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Hope this helps.4meter4 (talk) 01:54, 21 November 2019 (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.