Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The National Byway


 * 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. Ad Orientem (talk) 23:32, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

The National Byway

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable cycle path in the UK. The three links in the references section are all ineligible - two link to the National Byway site (primary reference) and the third is currently broken (but has since been fixed since the article was nominated).

WP:CYCLING has no specific guidance for cycle paths and there is a very real possibility the article fails to meet GNGs. ↅ𝜞 (Contact me) (See my edits) 23:38, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:54, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Cycling-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:54, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:54, 15 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment: fixed third link. Nördic   Nightfury  09:57, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep - I have added two book sources to the article which demonstrate notability, and here is another source, mentioning it as a significant cycle route round the UK. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:44, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Having a quick look at them now - I'm not certain that these are enough to make the network notable - the three passages are nothing more than passing looks at them. For example, the book linked to by Cwmhiraeth in this AFD has just a mere four-and-a-half lines of text dedicated to the network, with nothing more than basic facts already established in the article. Whilst the thought is still in my head, the link fixed by Nordic Nightfury (thanks, by the way :) ) appears to be for a shop selling cycling ephemera - with very little to nothing on the National Byways. Am I missing something here? ↅ𝜞 (Contact me) (See my edits) 00:58, 17 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep - this is a series of signed routes, not just a single route, and not just a term used on a map. It should be presumed notable.  Cwmhiraeth has provided references. Power~enwiki (talk) 19:39, 16 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep. Bike paths are notable.  Castles are notable, too.  We don't need AFDs about them. -- do  ncr  am  01:50, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
 * @Doncram: What makes this cycle path more notable than, for example, the local road it runs along? There are plenty of cycleways in England and the world, and very few are notable enough to be on Wikipedia - even if they are signposted. What makes this one any different - and where are the castles you speak of in this AFD? ↅ𝜞 (Contact me) (See my edits) 10:23, 20 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep A recent AfD for a similar but smaller cycle route ended up being withdrawn because it was inherently notable because of its sources. This is also the case here. Nördic   Nightfury  10:53, 20 June 2017 (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.