Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bethany Bridge

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. Tone 17:52, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bethany Bridge

[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)

Non-notable bridge. My prod rationale was Non-notable bridge. This just says it's a bridge and gives its coordinates. This is a brief notice that the bridge was closed due to filming, not significant coverage of the bridge. The information on the bridge here is mirrored from this article. I'm not convinced this is a reliable source, but it's not significant coverage anyway. Not a reliable source here. I'm seeing no way this bridge passes WP:GEOFEAT or WP:GNG., which still stands. Deprodded with a suggestion to merge, but since the content is completely unsourced, and looks WP:UNDUE for coverage of one relatively minor bridge at the lake article, I'm thinking deletion is the best call here. Hog Farm _Bacon 15:21, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm _Bacon 15:21, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm _Bacon 15:21, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Georgia (U.S. state)-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm _Bacon 15:21, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

delete Well, at least it isn't a deck girder bridge, but a steel truss from the era is likewise unremarkable, and there's no particular claim to notability. Mangoe (talk) 18:38, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Does not meet GNG or NGEO. I don't think there is a good merge target and the information is unsourced. // Timothy :: talk 22:37, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It is not completely unsourced as the first external link here confirms most of it, Atlantic306 (talk) 00:54, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete due to lack of reliable sourcing. It exists, but there isn't enough significant coverage about it to suggest notability. --Kinu ^t/_c 06:07, 18 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.