662:
564:
I've been following this discussion from afar, and I feel that I have to reply to this comment. "Eudora Bridge" wouldn't be any better of a name. Only one of the references added to the article uses a proper name for the bridge, #8 calls it the "Eudora Kaw River Bridge". If the article remains,
309:
This article has no references and merely asserts that the bridge in question exists. There is no "inherent notability" for every bridge which someone states exists or once existed. Unless someone can find multiple instances of significant coverage in reliable and independent sources, deletion is
479:
bridges to be notable...I'm not sure why I would find such an article for the Kansas River notable. It just seems almost like an excess of detail...Ninth Street, the main street in my hometown, has had a fair amount of local news coverage, but I still would consider an article about it to be
448:
I'm inviting you to write that article, it seems it would be a valuable addition to the project. I don't see you suggesting the content has no place on
Knowledge, just that you don't believe individual articles are appropriate for whatever reason. Its easy to serially nominate articles for
533:
directly above, please note that I just spent some time working on this article. The history of the bridge is frequently reported on. I question whether the proper name should be "222nd Street Bridge" because I can't find sources calling it that,
568:
Also, the fact that a local newspaper includes a historical tidbit whenever they cover a construction project doesn't really confirm notability to me either. I think that's pretty standard for any local newspaper and local bridge. --
310:
the appropriate outcome. If multiple bridge articles have been nominated, perhaps that is a result of someone creating multiple articles about non-notable bridges, rather than a demonstration of inappropriate action by the nominator.
426:
article were relevant to whether or not they are notable, which is the reason I nominated them for deletion. (Note that this is more towards the other nominations, and that I note your comment below was for this one).
168:
265:
408:, perhaps 20-40 hours would be sufficient to do that really well (ideally with a map listing by number all the bridges as well), then we can consider whether a few of these should redirect to that.--
257:
565:
that's probably the name that should be used. But the fact that the other seven articles can't be bothered to refer to the bridge by name indicates to me that it lacks notability.
373:
261:
273:
162:
121:
285:
269:
249:
281:
289:
353:
422:
How does that help establish notability for this or the other bridges I nominated? I was not aware that nominating several for deletion or the existence of a
463:
I don't even know why that article would be notable, to be honest...it's a short river, not even the longest in Kansas. I wouldn't consider articles over
252:
for an example of a previous AFD. Bridge articles on highways normally end up being kept as stubs simply because they eventually are proven to pass the
404:
has nominated a crapload of related bridge articles for deletion. Perhaps a better treatment could be had if KsOstm wants to be prepare an article on
128:
664:, and a 1917 paywalled mention or more from that same paper as well--this is assuming the predecessor bridge is in the article scope, of course. --
94:
89:
98:
81:
570:
183:
256:
through offline sources, which takes more time. Further, it seems to me that the nominator is going for a bulk deletion -- see
150:
233:
17:
339:
144:
423:
405:
670:
645:
629:
601:
578:
555:
511:
488:
458:
435:
417:
385:
365:
344:
319:
301:
240:
211:
63:
689:
40:
140:
595:
505:
85:
574:
190:
297:
685:
36:
668:
658:
591:
590:- sufficent sources to establish (barely) notability for a crossing over a significant waterway. -
535:
501:
228:
176:
77:
69:
642:
156:
497:
381:
361:
293:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
684:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
611:
472:
468:
334:
315:
665:
476:
546:..." to avoid confusion. Perhaps the Kansas DOT has an official name someone can find.--
464:
223:
58:
654:
548:
451:
410:
253:
200:
623:
543:
493:
377:
357:
115:
481:
428:
397:
329:
311:
204:
614:
to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
328:- Also, half of the bridges in this bulk deletion are not highway bridges. –
54:
496:
might be suitable - provided the size didn't reach that necessating a
266:
Knowledge:Articles for deletion/K-99 Wamego Bridge (2nd nomination)
678:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
268:(a second nomination of an AFD already closed as "keep"),
258:
Knowledge:Articles for deletion/North Kansas Avenue Bridge
111:
107:
103:
175:
262:
Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Lecompton Road Bridge
621:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
374:
278:
Knowledge:Articles for deletion/222nd Street Bridge
274:
Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Morse Street Bridge
286:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Paxico Road Bridge
270:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/K-32 Turner Bridge
250:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/K-99 Wamego Bridge
282:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Maple Hill Bridge
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
692:). No further edits should be made to this page.
641:Milowent's new sources clearly show notability.
290:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Highway 2 Bridge
189:
8:
372:Note: This debate has been included in the
352:Note: This debate has been included in the
538:might be better, starting the article "The
354:list of Kansas-related deletion discussions
371:
351:
220:- Non-notable bridge on non-notable road.
653:Sourcing in article appears to reach
248:We've gone through this before. See
7:
24:
661:article on the 1962 ice damage
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
671:17:50, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
424:Crossings of the Kansas River
406:Crossings of the Kansas River
64:19:17, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
646:21:48, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
630:01:24, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
602:03:52, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
579:02:32, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
556:21:43, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
529:: In addition to my general
512:03:52, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
489:22:30, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
459:21:55, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
436:21:50, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
418:20:11, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
386:01:45, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
366:01:45, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
345:11:00, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
320:03:59, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
302:03:04, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
254:general notability guideline
241:23:14, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
212:22:23, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
199:Bridge appears to fail the
709:
681:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
657:. There's a paywalled
494:Kansas River#Crossings
449:deletion, of course.--
659:The Hutchinson News
78:222nd Street Bridge
70:222nd Street Bridge
48:The result was
632:
554:
457:
416:
388:
368:
700:
683:
626:
620:
616:
598:
553:
508:
486:
473:Republican River
469:Smoky Hill River
456:
433:
415:
402:
342:
337:
332:
239:
236:
231:
226:
209:
194:
193:
179:
131:
119:
101:
62:
34:
708:
707:
703:
702:
701:
699:
698:
697:
696:
690:deletion review
679:
624:
609:
600:
596:
510:
506:
482:
477:Verdigris River
429:
398:
340:
335:
330:
234:
229:
224:
221:
205:
136:
127:
92:
76:
73:
53:
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
706:
704:
695:
694:
674:
673:
648:
635:
634:
633:
618:
617:
606:
605:
604:
594:
592:The Bushranger
584:
583:
582:
581:
566:
559:
558:
523:
522:
521:
520:
519:
518:
517:
516:
515:
514:
504:
502:The Bushranger
465:Arkansas River
441:
440:
439:
438:
390:
389:
369:
348:
347:
323:
304:
243:
197:
196:
133:
72:
67:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
705:
693:
691:
687:
682:
676:
675:
672:
669:
667:
663:
660:
656:
652:
649:
647:
644:
643:TheCatalyst31
640:
637:
636:
631:
628:
627:
619:
615:
613:
608:
607:
603:
599:
597:One ping only
593:
589:
586:
585:
580:
576:
572:
567:
563:
562:
561:
560:
557:
551:
550:
545:
541:
540:Eudora Bridge
537:
536:Eudora Bridge
532:
528:
525:
524:
513:
509:
507:One ping only
503:
499:
495:
492:
491:
490:
487:
485:
478:
474:
470:
466:
462:
461:
460:
454:
453:
447:
446:
445:
444:
443:
442:
437:
434:
432:
425:
421:
420:
419:
413:
412:
407:
403:
401:
395:
392:
391:
387:
383:
379:
375:
370:
367:
363:
359:
355:
350:
349:
346:
343:
338:
333:
327:
324:
321:
317:
313:
308:
305:
303:
299:
295:
294:Paul McDonald
291:
287:
283:
279:
275:
271:
267:
263:
259:
255:
251:
247:
244:
242:
238:
237:
232:
227:
219:
216:
215:
214:
213:
210:
208:
202:
192:
188:
185:
182:
178:
174:
170:
167:
164:
161:
158:
155:
152:
149:
146:
142:
139:
138:Find sources:
134:
130:
126:
123:
117:
113:
109:
105:
100:
96:
91:
87:
83:
79:
75:
74:
71:
68:
66:
65:
60:
56:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
680:
677:
650:
638:
622:
610:
587:
571:97.113.8.146
547:
544:Kansas River
539:
530:
526:
483:
450:
430:
409:
399:
393:
325:
306:
277:
245:
222:
217:
206:
198:
186:
180:
172:
165:
159:
153:
147:
137:
124:
49:
47:
31:
28:
480:excessive.
163:free images
666:j⚛e decker
498:WP:SPINOUT
686:talk page
542:over the
396:: I see
378:• Gene93k
358:• Gene93k
59:talk page
37:talk page
688:or in a
612:Relisted
549:Milowent
452:Milowent
411:Milowent
122:View log
39:or in a
625:MBisanz
169:WP refs
157:scholar
95:protect
90:history
655:WP:GNG
484:Ks0stm
431:Ks0stm
400:Ks0stm
326:Delete
312:Edison
307:Delete
218:Delete
207:Ks0stm
141:Google
99:delete
225:Dough
184:JSTOR
145:books
129:Stats
116:views
108:watch
104:links
16:<
651:Keep
639:Keep
588:Keep
575:talk
531:Keep
527:Note
500:. -
394:Keep
382:talk
362:talk
316:talk
298:talk
246:Keep
177:FENS
151:news
112:logs
86:talk
82:edit
55:J04n
50:keep
475:or
467:or
292:.--
201:GNG
191:TWL
120:– (
577:)
552:•
455:•
414:•
384:)
376:.
364:)
356:.
341:JM
336:N7
331:TC
318:)
300:)
288:,
284:,
280:,
276:,
272:,
264:,
260:,
235:72
230:48
203:.
171:)
114:|
110:|
106:|
102:|
97:|
93:|
88:|
84:|
52:.
573:(
471:/
380:(
360:(
322:.
314:(
296:(
195:)
187:·
181:·
173:·
166:·
160:·
154:·
148:·
143:(
135:(
132:)
125:·
118:)
80:(
61:)
57:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.