Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sustainable Transport Award


 * 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. The Bushranger One ping only 03:32, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Sustainable Transport Award

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No indication of significance Itsalleasy (talk) 03:22, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Merge to a short new section in Institute for Transportation and Development Policy. LibStar (talk) 03:35, 8 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep - The article does indicate the topic's significance. For example, see the lead, where it states "The STA directs international attention to cities on the cutting edge of transportation policy. By highlighting successful completed programs and emphasizing transferability, the award helps disseminate new ideas and best practices, while encouraging cities worldwide to improve their own livability."


 * – Also keep as meeting WP:GNG. Many sources cover winners of the award; there's enough content in reliable sources to merit a standalone article.
 * – Source examples include:, , , , , , , , . Northamerica1000(talk) 07:10, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 02:31, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 02:32, 9 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, &mdash; Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 22:53, 16 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep "No indication of significance" is part of WP:CSD, not notability. The WP:GNG here is clearly established by substantive coverage in multiple reliable sources, as listed by . --Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 04:22, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep per above. DavidLeighEllis (talk) 00:39, 22 January 2014 (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.