Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Benz Circle Flyover

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. Owen× ☎ 23:40, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Benz Circle Flyover

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Imagine if every flyover in the world had an article in Wikipedia. Lacks WP:N. Thewikizoomer (talk) 09:02, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Andhra Pradesh-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:31, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:51, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep there are sources present. The nomination statement seems to be dismissing the article based on its subject, not the sourcing available Garuda3 (talk) 16:56, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and also delete Kanakadurga Flyover as well. This is peak WP:MILL. Kinopiko ^talk 03:02, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
MILL is an essay and not policy. Garuda3 (talk) 20:39, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is someone's expression of policy. Geschichte (talk) 08:48, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - could be easily merged into Vijayawada article's transportation section. No need for separate article. RWILD ✉ 02:41, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep, delete, merge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 09:12, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to National Highway 16 (India).TheLongTone (talk) 10:48, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why? You need to give some reasoning for your answer or it will be ignored by the closer. Garuda3 (talk) 11:16, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Because there is little to say, and that little could easil;y be acommodated in the target article. Frequently a subject is better served by being in a wider context. TheLongTone (talk) 14:22, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I'm not seeing a problem here - it's a major engineering project in a busy area, and the sources already in the article show enough sustained coverage to meet GNG. Adam Sampson (talk) 12:42, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The sources for this article are good enough to pass WP:GNG. It leans heavily on The New Indian Express, which, according to the RS Noticeboard is reliable. The Times of India has to be used with caution, but the article cited does not seem to be an advertorial, so it can be used. The other source is The Hans India which is mentioned in RS Noticeboard but without it saying anything about its reliability. DesiMoore (talk) 15:33, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Those voting keep would be more credible if they could be bothered to update the article, which is about a proposed chunk of infrastructure, due for completion in 2022. Has anybody paid it any attention recently??TheLongTone (talk) 14:27, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I'm leaning delete on this one. The sources used are borderline reliable, but just the little segment of the road, a flyover is not notable by itself. No major newspaper covers about the flyover in depth and maintaining an article about it doesn't make much sense. The notability guidelines are hence not met per GNG and the lack of any impact of the structure in the economy or any further improvements in the area points towards deletion. We are not a directory (WP:NOTDIR) who keep tabs on all the flyovers of a region with no notability whatsoever. As with the source analysis, TOI is deemed unreliable and should be used cautiously. Others are okay but heavy reliance on News Minute again points towards the lack of notability. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 13:17, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 15:16, 10 October 2024 (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.