Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Farnam Street

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. Daniel (talk) 03:34, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Farnam Street (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

This is a non-notable street that doesn't appear to pass WP:GNG. (Contested PROD) Imzadi 1979 → 00:30, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Imzadi 1979 → 00:30, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nebraska-related deletion discussions. Imzadi 1979 → 00:30, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - another WP:RUNOFTHEMILL city street. Not passing GNG, not even a numbered route to redirect to. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 08:11, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete nothing suggests this is a street notable enough to merit an article on Wikipedia.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:33, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 07:24, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep People use it all the time. I am from near Omaha and it is used as an alternate to the main street of Omaha, Dodge Street. Ask any person from Omaha, and they'll know farnam Street. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhawbh (talk • contribs) 17:51, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • None of those are reasons to have an article on Wikipedia, Bhawbh. To have an article, we need "significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject". Unless you can find some specific sources that are about the street (and not just mentioning it passing), and unless those sources are reliable, the street just doesn't warrant an article. Imzadi 1979 → 00:07, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep, I found a source about the street. two actually. It does warrant an article according to the rules of Imzadi 1979 User talk:Imzadi1979. If an entire article about Farnam Street from the actual magazine of OMaha isn't enough, I dunno what is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhawbh (talk • contribs) 18:03, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • Moving comment here to avoid appearance of double voting. Two sources a couple months apart about a single subtopic (the one-way section) does not equate to "significant coverage", sorry. Where's the rest of the media coverage of the roadway over the years, discussing other aspects? Imzadi 1979 → 18:51, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, no evidence that this is anything other than a generic street in a mid-sized city, a search brought up only passing mentions. Devonian Wombat (talk) 23:41, 27 January 2021 (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.