Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trans Global Highway (2nd nomination)


 * 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   no consensus. The article may need significant editing to clarify its scope. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 15:07, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Trans Global Highway
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article does not appear to be notable as a topic unto itself. The only source speaking of a "trans global highway" is sourced to the website transglobalhighway.com. The rest is a collection of mostly unreferenced WP:SYNTH and WP:OR info about certain areas where there are gaps, and not about their role or proposed role in a trans global highway. Note that there are many questions to its notbility on the talk page and a semi move war over a redirect by a user to Pan-American Highway (which is not a suitable source as it is not "global" in scope, and I cannot find any other suitable target location) has also recently occurred. Thus bringing here for a wider discussion. Ravendrop 20:53, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete; this particular concept isn't notable in its own right. There have been various other fantasies about global infrastructure networks, but we shouldn't treat them as serious proposals, or give them undue weight. bobrayner (talk) 21:13, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:24, 17 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep; The Trans Global Highway article should and must remain as the project is and has been significant and in both discussion as well as in the planning stages for over 200 years.   The fact that all elements and segments of the highway have not yet been unified into the Trans Global Highway, should not be a reason to remove this vitally important article.    The Trans Global Highway has been referred to by many different names over the past 200 years including the "Inter Continental Highway", "Trans World Highway",  "Cosmopolitan Highway" and many other names.   The planning for the Trans Global Highway goes way beyond the Trans Global Highway NGO (www.TransGlobalHighway.org).

Many books and printed articles have been written on the topic or have mentioned the Trans Global Highway over the past 200 years. Here are a handful of such writings:


 * "The Three Americas Railway: An International and Intercontinental Enterprise" book written in 1881 by Hinton Rowan Helper discusses the need for an Intercontinental Highway, using railroads, starting on page 418.    The Trans Global Highway article also mentions the need for a global railroad network.


 * "The Rotarian", January 1936. An extensive article entitled "Seeking Peace in a Concrete Way" is written about the Inter Continental Highway, starting on page 42.


 * "Looking far north: the Harriman Expedition to Alaska, 1899" written in 1982 by William H. Goetzmann, Kay Sloan, writes that Harriman in 1899 proposed a "Round the World Railroad" (page 128). The authors go on to write that Harriman traveled to Japan a few years later to continue this proposal.


 * "The Bering Strait Crossing: A 21st Century Frontier Between East and West" by James Oliver published in 2006 (256 pages) mentions extensively the Intercontinental Highway. He goes on to mention that the notion of a global highway has been around for hundreds of years including William Gilpen, who suggests it in 1846 was a proponent of a global rail highway to link to the then being proposed European and Asiatic Railway.


 * "Planning and Design of Bridges" by M. S. Troitsky, 1994 describes many of the bridges and tunnels proposed in the Trans Global Highway article including on page 39 this book mentions that in 1958, T.Y. Lin mentions the possible construction of a Bering Strait bridge (and obviously a needed highway network).


 * Alaska History: A Publication of the Alaska Historical Society, Volumes 4-6 (1989) mentions on page 6 that in 1892, a man named Strauss proposed a global highway and a man made bridge over the Bering Strait.  The article goes on to mention the Lin proposal of 1958.


 * "Maritime Information Review" a publication of the Netherlands Maritime Information Centre,  in 1991 had an extensive article, on "strait crossings" covering the then proposed Bering Strait bridge, the Gibraltar Tunnel and so on, and mentions the proposed global highway network.


 * Popular Mechanics Apr 1994 has an article called "Alaska Siberia Bridge" and the article goes on to mention the construction of a global highway.

The above are just a handful of the hundreds of articles and books that have been written on the proposed Trans Global Highway. The potential references for the Trans Global Highway is very extensive.

Many distinguished and intellectual websites have discussed the Trans-Global Highway. A quick search on Google.com, Yahoo.com, Bing.com or others will quickly show thousands of discussions covering the Trans Global Highway (using either the Trans Global Highway name or any one of many other variant names, such as the Cosmopolitan Highway or others, as mentioned above.

Russian President Putin as well as Japan's prime minister Abe, both in their first terms, also have mentioned the need for a Global Highway, including the Bearing Straight Tunnel.

The Schiller Institute in the late 1980's wrote about the need for a unified highway system that they referred to as the Cosmopolitan Highway (http://www.schillerinstitute.org/economy/maps/maps3.html#bering%20straits). In 1923, when the Pan American Highway (also referred to at the time as the "Trans America Highway") treaty was being signed, there was also mention of extending this highway to cross the Bering Strait and become a global highway. It is apparent that they signators viewed the Pan American Highway as a portion of a future global highway (ie Trans Global Highway). The Trans Global Highway is the key to connecting the world in the not to distant future.

The Trans Global Highway Wikipedia entry should be expanded and encouraged, not removed. Detailed maps, other alternative paths and photographs should be added to the entry to enhance the article.

If you look at the statistics for the page, you will see that in just the past day, about 80 people have logged onto the page. This translates to 2400 people per month who are interested in the topic. The number would have no doubt been higher had the page not been forwarded to the Pan American Highway article and thus deprived of its own index. These statistics show that the idea of Global Unification by a physical pathway is indeed of general interest and is something on people's minds.

The Trans Global Highway is a summation of the goals and aspirations of people around the world proposing a global highway over the past 200 years. The Trans Global Highway is a lot more than lines on the map. It is a direction for the future. The Trans Global Highway article must remain and is perhaps the single most important article in the field of highways on Wikipedia. The article should be expanded to include greater detail on the Trans Global Highway. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.25.224.136 (talk) 08:28, 17 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete—the wall of text above establishes the notability needed for an article on a Bering Strait Tunnel, but it doesn't convince me of the notability of this purported concept.  Imzadi 1979  →   13:25, 17 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep Keep this article and don't forward it to something else!   It is such a great and well known idea.  It took me 10 minutes to find it because of the forwarding to the Pan American Highway.  Not fair!!!   We spent a week in school discussing the Trans Global Highway and the various bridges and tunnels that will have to be built and the fact that the railroads will have to be standardized.   We obtained a lot of info from the Trans Global website and from a UN office.   I don't understand why anyone would want to remove this article.   BTW the Bering Straight or Asian American Peace tunnel will be thousands of miles away from the nearest roads and of course a major highway network will have to be built.  As we discussed in class, the Trans Global Highway organization calls for standardized world wide highways, tolls, customs and so on.   This is a wonderful project and has been mentioned by so many governmental organizations.  This standardization seems like a much better idea than what happened with the "Pan American Highway" which was never completely built and has all sorts of good and bad roads.   Keep this article on the Trans Global Highway!!!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.74.228.134 (talk) 04:02, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Using a different IP address doesn't entitle you to "vote" a second time. These discussions are based on policy and consensus, not on votestacking. bobrayner (talk) 12:48, 20 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete as redundant - Most sections in the article have there own article anyway. - →Davey 2010→ →Talk to me!→  15:46, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - I feel a bit of a dick as I assumed from the title It was a list of "highways" .... Turns out I was wrong, Admittingly it could be better sourced but other than that the article isn't that bad & is actually rather interesting imo. - →Davey 2010→ →Talk to me!→  00:59, 24 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep I think that the article must be reworked since it does not seem to reflect the unique Trans Global Highway proposal.  The word "highway" seems to be confusing since most people associate this word with a road, rather than as a pathway, which is what the Trans Global Highway project is all about and what distinguishes it from the Cosmopolitan Highway and other roadway proposals in the past.  After completion, the Trans Global Highway will be a pathway for water pipelines and thus will make arid areas productive, it will also be a pathway for electrical cables, gas and oil pipelines and communication cables.  It is generally understood that rail lines will be the primary vehicle traveling along the Trans Global Highway system, similar to the Chunnel today.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.21.223.246 (talk) 02:41, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note to closing admin: this and the other two keep !votes are highly likely to be the same dynamic IP. - The Bushranger One ping only 08:18, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:CRYSTAL, and per all the other arguments that have been made. - The Bushranger One ping only 08:18, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. If this article had a bunch of maps with new motorways then it would be an original synthesis and crystal ball gazing however it doesn't have that. Instead it has a brief paragraph on each of a number of related projects, each of which has it's own WP article. Think of it as a well developed List article if that makes it easier for you to accept it. filceolaire (talk) 13:17, 23 April 2014 (UTC) Or even rename it as '''List of major proposed ocean links or something similar. filceolaire (talk) 13:27, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 23:55, 23 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep There seem to be many sources for this (including a report by the WDF I found in the last deletion discussion ), and it looks like this article just meets general notability requirements. That being said, this article really needs some major editing. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 00:46, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete I can see both arguments but I lean towards delete if only because I really don't believe that can realistically come to fruition due to the Atlantic crossing. I realise that not neccessarily a relevant point to an AfD, but think about this. How many "pipe dreams" (for want of a better word) pass the notability test? Not many I'll wager. Dragonfire X (talk) 11:28, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Just a comment, but I don't think how probable something is relates to how notable something is. We have articles an article on perpetual motion, even though it is provably impossible, while things that are provably real often don't get an article. The reason for this is that perpetual motion is covered in reliable sources while the real stuff is not. Regardless of how improbable this article is, I think that it is covered in enough sources to justify keeping it. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 23:27, 24 April 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.