Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brimley Road

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, default to keep. --Bongwarrior (talk) 02:10, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Brimley Road (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Non-notable road in Toronto. Article reads like a page from a tourism pamphlet. No historical relevance. Suttungr (talk) 02:58, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Seems to be one in a series of Toronto roads articles. think we should let the creators run with the concept without chipping away at its constituent parts. --Tagishsimon (talk) 03:03, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. There is no assertion of notability about this particular road in the article. Mh29255 (talk) 03:15, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Most city streets are not notable, and this article doesn't do anything to assert that it is. It also lacks any references. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 04:51, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. While there are reliable sources that mention Brimley Road, they are trivial mentions not about the road itself. All the content falls under the scope of other articles on Toronto neighbourhoods and transportation. However, I'm pretty sure that it used to be a concession road, and there's no doubt that it's major in bordering several neighbourhoods. –Pomte 08:01, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Nothing in the article pushes that this is street is more important than any other street in Toronto or the surrounding areas, nor can I find anything in 20 minutes of digging around the internet. Unless someone can find something I missed that makes this one special, I'd say it has to go.Aeternitas827 (talk) 07:52, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. There's noting notable about this street for Wikipedia standards. --Son (talk) 16:23, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. This entry will be worked upon. There is access to Highway 401, and is a major part of Scarborough's Town Centre. Dumping this entry at this time is anal. Bacl-presby (talk) 21:27, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Sorry, major arterials are not notable. Many roads have access to Highway 401 and are a part of Scarborough's Town Centre. --Rschen7754 (T C) 23:40, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Highway 401 is a controlled access freeway, which by definition and intent means very few roads have direct access to it. Brimley is interchange #380 (see List of exits on Highway 401 (Ontario)). 65.95.173.151 (talk) 02:08, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. —Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:25, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Unlikely to be a WP:50k road, and no other indications of notability. Grutness...wha? 01:01, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - WP:50k is a userfied essay, not a policy or even a guideline. 65.95.173.151 (talk) 02:08, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Reply. I know that - it's my userfied essay, and as such is the standard I use to decide whether I regard something as notable enough to be kept. I repeat - this ain't a WP:50k road. Unless other notability can be found for it, it shouldn't have an article here. Grutness...wha? 00:48, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Brimley is formally designated by Toronto as a major arterial (at least the Finch-Eglinton portion, covering the 401 interchange) [1]. This designation has formal legal and operational implications, rather than being a subjective notion. ([2], etc). That desgination plus vehicle volume (32000/day) is significant and is now added to the article. Besides, hasn't deletionism gone too far? 65.95.173.151 (talk) 02:08, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • So? Major arterials are not notable for Wikipedia. --Rschen7754 (T C) 20:40, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep - seems notable based on comments. It needs sources, though, and the "things to do" tourist information should either be deleted or put into some narrative fashion and made more encyclopedic, and sourced as well. Wikidemo (talk) 02:43, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Non-trivial news coverage of some incidents added and cited. As an intercity road between Toronto and Markham (as indicated, a major arterial with substantial traffic volume), it has notability and function for the same reasons as Woodbine Avenue which was unanimously restored at Deletion Review. Dl2000 (talk) 02:46, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Keep - looking at it in context of List of oldest buildings and structures in Toronto, I'm sure that this road has plenty of Cites. The question is, are they still available, or have relevant newspapers all rotted away to dust. Exit2DOS2000^•T•C• 02:50, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Yonge St? Notable. Bloor St? Notable. Brimley Rd? I don't think so. A road that goes nowhere in the middle of nowhere. Atrian (talk) 13:54, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment "middle of nowhere"? Scarborough is a well-populated area of Toronto, the largest city in Canada. This road goes right through this area, and at least three notable attractions are along its length. --Pwnage8 (talk) 18:47, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - well sourced and of interest to road and local history buffs. Reggie Perrin (talk) 17:26, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep. Looking at it, my feeling is that this article is capable of acquiring verifiable references, as per Exit2DOS2000 above. The article does need work, but that isn't really a deletion argument and in this case I feel the road is notable. SorryGuy  Talk  09:02, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Phoenix-wiki 19:57, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I disagree with the notion that this "reads like a page from a tourism pamphlet. No historical relevance." (the reason we are having this "debate"). If this was even a problem to begin with, it's certainly been corrected by now. And of course, the "non-notable" thing has been refuted. --Pwnage8 (talk) 20:34, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Not sure we should be keeping roads at all, but if so, this one seems reasonable. Hobit (talk) 21:53, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep seems to have been greatly improved since nomination, note that several references use the road in the title of articles, so it appears to have multiple nontrivial resources. Rigadoun (talk) 23:23, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The article has doubled in size since the nomination, so it definitely appears there is incentive to improve this article. There are sufficient sources to meet notability standards - while some of them are trivial, there are enough direct mentions to make this acceptable. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:31, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Not notable at all. Malinaccier (talk) 00:30, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Oppose to Malinaccier, Brimley Road is a very notable road in Toronto. Filled with cultural diversity and landmarks, this road is highly notable. The Canadian Roadgeek (talk) 18:39, 4 January 2008 (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.