Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/U.S. Route 15-501 in North Carolina


 * 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   convert to disambiguation page. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 23:02, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

U.S. Route 15-501 in North Carolina
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

I am recommending that U.S. Route 15-501 in North Carolina be deleted. It was originally setup with only focus on the combined section of US 15 and US 501 in North Carolina. Later, it was modified to include both in more detail without breaking them out as two separate pages. Now that two separate pages have finally been created for the two US Routes (that will make it easier to go into more detail regarding history, future, differences, etc.), this page is no longer needed. --WashuOtaku (talk) 00:01, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment leaning oppose on technical grounds. Was content copied across from the US 15-501 article into the separate US 15 in NC and US 501 in NC articles? If so, this can't be deleted. If the content was copied, under the terms of the licenses used here, it has to be redirected to one or the other article, and then copied has to be added to the talk pages of the all three articles to attribute the content correctly.
 * Having said all of that, I support the essential proposal, but a deletion isn't possible. Split and duplicate the content as needed, apply the attribution templates, and then redirect US 15-501 to one of the articles and call it a day.  Imzadi 1979  →   12:06, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * If a deletion isn't possible, then a redirect to U.S. Route 15 in North Carolina seems the prudent choice of the two, it's the dominant partner in the relationship (using it's mile markers along the route). --WashuOtaku (talk) 16:24, 20 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Convert to dab page Delete if possible. If the page needs to stay for attribution, I would turn it into a dab page.  Dough 48  72  15:12, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Convert to dab page Delete noting concerns above. --Rschen7754 15:15, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Redirect to U.S. Route 15 in North Carolina per Imzadi1979. It would be nice to split the material evenly between the two routes, but since US 15 is the dominant of the two routes, I've got to go with redirecting it to US 15. I almost considered directing it back to the main US 15 and/or US 501 pages, though. DanTD 23:31, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * In this case, it doesn't matter where it redirects; the page history can't be deleted for licensing reasons. The only way around that restriction is to copy a list of every account or IP that edited the article to the talk pages. If such a list is created (doesn't have to be a direct copy of the page history) then the redirect wouldn't need to be retained for technical/licensing issues. Dough's suggestion of making it a dab page is also valid over a redirect. In any case, if WashuOtaku or someone else copied text from this article into the others, some attribution must be maintained.  Imzadi 1979  →   23:36, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment Is it possible to merge the history from US 15-501 to both US 15 and US 501? If we can, let's do that and delete US 15-501.  If not, we could history merge into US 15 and then consider US 501 a fork of US 15.  Hopefully, that would take care of the license issue. –Fredddie™ 13:12, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Note to closer I have refactored this discussion to include the standard deletion templates. Furthermore the discussion was not listed in a daily AfD log, so I am listing it now. Please consider the time of this post as the time of initial listing for closing purposes. Monty  845  14:49, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep This is a major thoroughfare of the Research Triangle and an important part of Durham/Chapel Hill local identity. I see over a million ghits for 15-501 -wikipedia (the formal title is too specific for effective searching). As "15-501," the road has significance beyond what can be covered in articles on 15 and 501 separately. --BDD (talk) 20:38, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Problem is, 15-501 could mean anything; could be part of a phone number, a part number, etc. --Rschen7754 05:01, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of North Carolina-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:12, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:12, 6 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Convert to DAB maintaining history per above concerns. -- No  unique  names  04:41, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — foxj 22:29, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Keep - It's not Wikipedia's position to second guess publishing decisions of reliable sources. There's hundreds of reliable sources that discuss U.S. 15-501. A recent one is Discussion group to study 15-501 corridor. The topic U.S. Route 15-501 in North Carolina meets WP:GNG. What about article x? - What about U.S. Route 15 in North Carolina and U.S. Route 501 in North Carolina is not a basis to delete the article U.S. Route 15-501 in North Carolina. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 00:58, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes it is - redundancy. --Rschen7754 20:29, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * U.S. Route 15-501 in North Carolina is not redundant of U.S. Route 15 in North Carolina/U.S. Route 501 in North Carolina in the reliable source world and Wikipedia is here merely to reflect that world. As I noted, there's hundreds of reliable sources that specifically discuss "U.S. 15-501" as a topic. Merely because some Wikipedians choose to write either U.S. Route 15 in North Carolina or U.S. Route 501 in North Carolina to be redundant of U.S. Route 15-501 in North Carolina doesn't make the topic redundant. It merely means these topic need to write a better representative survey of the relevant literature. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 03:09, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep notable thoroughfare through a major city. sufficient reliable sources both available and already in the article.  Meets notability guidelines for a dedicated article.  Additional the article should be renamed, removing "in North Carolina".  This is unnecessary. RadioFan (talk) 15:20, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
 * The U.S. Route 15 in North Carolina and U.S. Route 501 in North Carolina articles already cover this segment of roadway. We don't need three articles saying essentially the exact same things. The challenge isn't notability, it's triple redundancy.  Imzadi 1979  →   21:45, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge content specific to the 15-501 section of road from the 15 and 501 articles into the 150, leave a main link behind so readers can find their way.--RadioFan (talk) 12:57, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * That doesn't make any sense. Where is there another article where you have to stop reading it at one point, go to another article to continue reading about it, and then you have to go back to the first article to finish? –Fredddie™ 22:44, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Because 15-501 is an entity unto itself beyond highway 15 on one side and highway 501 and can (and has been) covered adequately in a dedicated article. That and mentioning a related topic in one article with a pointer to the more detailed dedicated article is pretty common here.--RadioFan (talk) 17:49, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
 * But what if someone only cares about the routing of U.S. Route 15 in North Carolina, and doesn't give a rip about 501? --Rschen7754 01:59, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Convert to disambiguation page. I recognize the term 15-501 is a big deal, but there are significant portions of both US 15 and US 501 that are not part of the concurrency. In this case, redundancy is not necessarily a bad thing, and is definitely preferable to requiring a user to jump back and forth between articles.  V C  14:40, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Agreed. We have U.S. Route 2 in Michigan, U.S. Route 41 in Michigan and M-35 (Michigan highway) that each cover the same 7–8 miles of highway. As well, US 41 and M-28 (Michigan highway) also cover the same 60 miles. Redundancy isn't a problem when it's necessary.  Imzadi 1979  →   15:51, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Mr. Stradivarius  (have a chat) 13:52, 23 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisting comment. Some of the editors above changed from "delete" to "convert to dab" or "redirect" due to the requirement that the page history be kept. However, it is entirely possible to keep the history and make U.S. Route 15-501 in North Carolina appear as a red link; all that's necessary is to move the page somewhere. It could be moved to a subpage of the talk page that the material was merged into, or it could be moved to a more likely title and then redirected to one of the relevant articles. After that, we can use the copied template on the pages that had material merged into them, and the problem would be solved. (See WP:MAD for the full explanation.) My reason for relisting is that once editors realised that this is a valid outcome, then they might want to alter their positions. — Mr. Stradivarius  (have a chat) 14:01, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
 * We don't need to make it a redlink, and this AfD has been discussed for over a month (opened on August 20) so some finality would be appreciated.  Imzadi 1979  →   15:09, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Convert to disambiguation page. Since deleting it isn't an option for various reasons, this seems the valid choice.  I feel another redundant page would be pointless. ``WashuOtaku (talk) 19:09, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment - I checked again and the hundreds of reliable sources that specifically discuss U.S. 15-501 are still there, so my position remains keep. "U.S. Route 15-501 in North Carolina" is recognizable to readers, unambiguous, and consistent with usage in reliable English-language sources. Proposing that U.S. Route 15-501 in North Carolina should be made into a DAB because there are articles on U.S. Route 15 in North Carolina and U.S. Route 501 in North Carolina is nothing more than the What about article x? argument listed in Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 12:18, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep without prejudice to a merge, splitting of content, etc., per further discussion. This AfD isn't about the notability of the route(s), just whether the topic should be organized as it is now.--Milowent • hasspoken  22:02, 1 October 2012 (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.