This article was nominated for deletion on 12 December 2008 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Travel and Tourism Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Travel and Tourism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of travel and tourism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Travel and TourismWikipedia:WikiProject Travel and TourismTemplate:WikiProject Travel and TourismTourism articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Highways Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Highways, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of highways on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HighwaysWikipedia:WikiProject HighwaysTemplate:WikiProject HighwaysHighways articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

I say, let's do it, for the reasons discussed at the December 2008 deletion request. -- Triadian ( talk) 22:50, 17 December 2008 (UTC) reply

• Oppose merger. A tourist route is not necessarily scenic, but may be constructed as a bypass to excessive urban traffic. Hadrianheugh ( talk) 15:22, 30 August 2009 (UTC) reply

• 1. This artice is US centric and low quality
• 2. This article is a roads, not a highway topic
• 3. There are many tourist routes around the world that are both scenic and designated tourist routes
• 4. Needs renaming to US scenic routes and kept as US designated routes, or globalise and improve
• 5. Theme routes is insufficiently explored and should be a separate article.

satusuro 15:07, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
reply