Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sebastian County Road 4G Bridge


 * 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 merge to List of bridges on the National Register of Historic Places in Arkansas. With no prejudice iff significant coverage can be found, but as it stands there is clear consensus that merging is the most appropriate outcome in this case. (non-admin closure) RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 15:33, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Sebastian County Road 4G Bridge

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Fails WP:GNG. The guideline at WP:NBUILD states there is a presumption of notability for assigned national heritage features for which verifiable information beyond simple statistics is available. However 1) a presumption is not a guarantee - it was included in this guideline because the vast majority of national heritage structures will meet GNG, but this one doesn't. It doesn't even merit a mention in its block nomination form 2) as both GEOLAND and WP:WHYN make clear, we need sufficient sourcing to write a proper article - a few sentences describing the location and simple statistics aren't enough. --Pontificalibus 16:06, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. --Pontificalibus  16:07, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arkansas-related deletion discussions. --Pontificalibus  16:07, 22 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment Found this source . I've also rescued the nomination form source which was broken. I'm unable to read the other two sources cited in the CALS source, if those have sufficient information it could be enough to keep this. Jumpytoo Talk 00:41, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 02:54, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 02:54, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Merge > List of bridges on the National Register of Historic Places in Arkansas, until such time as NRHP thematic resource article or multiple property article Historic bridges of Arkansas is written.Djflem (talk) 18:04, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 22:09, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Merge with List of bridges on the National Register of Historic Places in Arkansas. It's a 44-foot bridge with one paragraph to its name. AdoTang (talk) 14:32, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep A listing on the NRHP is notable, there is probably a long-enough description in the nominating documents on file with the Parks Service. Article needs expansion but should be kept, for notability and heritage promotion. Oaktree b (talk) 16:52, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Merge, but allow recreation if additional sources are found. The NHRP is a good indicator of notability but not a sole indicator. SportingFlyer  T · C  11:42, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Merge to List of bridges on the National Register of Historic Places in Arkansas. I was unable to find any secondary sources covering the bridge in depth. Page 7 of the nomination form for the bridge notes that the bridge is significant because it was built in 1940 and is typical of masonry/concrete bridges built during that time period. The form provides no historical information beyond the year it was built and the agency responsible and does nothing to distinguish this specific bridge from all of the other concrete/mason bridges built in the WWII era. None of these facts make me believe that additional sources exist, so a merge is the best option. (If my analysis turns out to be wrong though, I have no prejudice against re-creation). (In terms of the encyclopedia, language about the bridge itself is very scarce; it mainly consists of discussion about a county-wide effort to improve infrastructure. While I can't access two of the sources listed, they all appear to be primary sources associated with the WPA and and state agency responsible for inventorying roads and bridges. There really is just not much that an be said about the bridge). Spirit of Eagle (talk) 02:56, 7 April 2021 (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.