Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Santa Clara River Trail


 * 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. Mgm|(talk) 09:35, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Santa Clara River Trail

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This is a procedural relist of a bundled AfD (see here for previous discussion). The original rationale (by User:JamesBurns) stated: "Wikipedia is neither a travelguide WP:NOTTRAVEL, nor a how-to manual WP:NOTMANUAL. Articles fail to establish why these paths are particularly notable. Some of the content in these also reads like opinion pieces, eg. "The Western Balboa section is frequented by soccer players and observers, which can make cycling tedious.", "The entire path is on the beach, affording beautiful views, mixed with the hazard of beachgoing pedestrians who do not respect the boundaries of the path." Tavix (talk) 20:55, 29 March 2009 (UTC) 
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions.  -- — LinguistAtLarge • Talk  23:49, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Notable urban bike trail, any WP:NOTTRAVEL concerns should be addressed by removing inappropriate content, Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:38, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Notable. ChildofMidnight (talk) 01:58, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Reads like a travel guide for the trail.  -- Dennis The Tiger   (Rawr and stuff) 03:44, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Then improve it. Drmies (talk) 02:01, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:59, 2 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep since this trail is highly notable. Seriously, 37 hits over two decades in reliable sources for the phrase in quotes, that's notability. Drmies (talk) 02:01, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. The article looks like a reasonable description of the trail, and not unduly travelbook like. Clearly, a travel guide has been used to source the bulk of the article but WP:NOTTRAVEL means that our articles should avoid being travel guides, not that we should avoid using travel guides as sources. The trail is covered in plenty of media on numerous occasions as established by Drmies, so it is not a hopeless cause and it should pass notability guidelines. Sjakkalle (Check!)  08:08, 3 April 2009 (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.