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. Sandstein 17:29, 16 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Prod rationale was Non-notable bridge. Only gets two sentences in
this local news piece. The two sources listed in the article are primary sources. Beyond that, I'm just getting wp mirrors and sources that are about the guy this bridge is named after, not the bridge itself. PROD was declined procedurally, as it had been deprodded back in 2014. My argument for the proposed deletion still stands. I'm not seeing notability here.
Hog FarmBacon 01:00, 8 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Weak keep: As the maker of the page, I would like for the article to stay. I know there is a precedent against it, but I think that, since the bridge exists, an article about it should, too.
Morriswa (Charlotte Allison) (
talk) 04:51, 8 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete Existence is not notability. This is a short, generic segment of elevated road with no significant coverage about it; there are probably tens of thousands of such unremarkable bridges in the US, with off-the-shelf infrastructure design.
Reywas92Talk 09:20, 8 September 2020 (UTC)reply
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.