Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Telegraph Road 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 delete. Missvain (talk) 01:15, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Telegraph Road Bridge

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A non-notable bridge in Monroe County, Michigan. Overly detailed and cited with self-published websites (that don't work). Article has remained tagged for issues yet unedited for years. —Notorious4life (talk) 16:24, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:45, 7 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom, no notability asserted. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 20:50, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Engineering-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:34, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:34, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. Lightburst (talk) 21:24, 11 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete. I found this related to the monitoring system discussed in the article. Not much else. Checked newspapers.com and found some routine announcements of lane closures for maintenance on Telegraph Road Bridge in Michigan - but there is also a Telegraph Road Bridge on on US 24 in Michigan, so I'm not sure any of those were even about the right bridge. NN. MB 05:32, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:SIGCOV. Two soures are wikis, and the third is original scholarship. If this bridge were 70 or 100 years old, it might be considered historic and worthy for that reason, but this is just an ordinary bridge. Bearian (talk) 21:19, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete I was mistaken about the rarity of the bridge (confused it with another Telegraph Bridge) This bridge is not particularly notable. Th study gets wide coverage, but the structure does not have notability. Keep WP:NOTCLEANUP. passes WP:NGEO Artificial features related to infrastructure (for example, bridges and dams) can be notable under Wikipedia's GNG. Where their notability is unclear, they generally redirect to more general articles or to a named natural feature that prompted their creation, e.g., to an article about the notable road it carries or the notable obstacle it spans. It is apparently an historic bridge ..."rare example of a multi-span concrete through girder". Notable enough for the government to spend 1.8 million dollars to save it. Detroit Free Press. We should clean it up, not delete it. Lightburst (talk) 21:23, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is really a WP:TNT case; references are not RS (two of the three are junk and the third is not a suitable ref); we have some refs for existance but almost zero quality sources for WP-notabilty. However, the real problem here is the text which is just junk/almost inchoerent (probably pasted in from some technical document) and bears little useful discription to the subject to any reader (e.g. it is useless).  Of course, the core issue is that there are just no refs from which to build a proper useful article on this structure.  Britishfinance (talk) 22:26, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Looks like it was copied from University of Michigan wiki. Our article was created by on 23 August 2013, and the UMich wiki was written by a user named Sloane just prior (history). –dlthewave ☎ 17:09, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Not knowingly by me. I've rewritten that section totally.  7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 17:56, 12 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete The old bridge found in Lightburst's first link is at and is not the one described in the article or any other links. I don't see notability anywhere for generic highway overpasses and routine construction projects. Reywas92Talk 22:54, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks Reywas92. I see that first link is another bridge. I struck that source. Lightburst (talk) 00:11, 12 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep The bridge is notable because of the ground breaking (first) use of embedded sensors to monitor stress. You have missed the many sources (now in the article), and misunderstood the reasons for the bridge's notability.  It is an engineering milestone.  7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 14:55, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I removed several of the tags. The links now all work.  Article has been improved since you nominated it.  Perhaps your missed these sources. Meets WP:GNG and WP:NGEO, I think. 7&amp;6=thirteen</b> (<b style="color:#000">☎</b>) 15:49, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment: The article I tagged for deletion described the Telegraph Road Bridge as part of I-275 at 42.01831°N, -83.34656°W, but the history section added in the article describes the unrelated old ruins of a bridge at 41.98214°N, -83.37192°W? I still don't think that the use of new technology on a run-of-the-mill bridge creates notability to the bridge itself. —Notorious4life (talk) 16:08, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * These are parallel bridges. Indeed, someone had put "Context" tag, which this addresses. I disagree about the importance of the technology and study, but we will have to see what the civil engineers have to say.  You are entitled to your opinion FWIW.  <b style="color:#060">7&amp;6=thirteen</b> (<b style="color:#000">☎</b>) 16:19, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * These are not parallel bridges. The historical bridges crossed Stony Creek which is about three miles away. –dlthewave ☎ 16:46, 12 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete – The sensor system might be notable, but not one of the bridges it was installed on (not the first per sources, just one of the first, and I haven't seen any sources call it a "milestone" as our article currently states). Fails NBRIDGE GNG. – Leviv<span style="display:inline-block;position:relative;transform:rotate(45deg);bottom:-.57em;">ich 18:19, 12 January 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.