Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of bridges and tunnels in Macau

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 keep. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of bridges and tunnels in Macau

Delete, bridges and tunnels themselves are not notable. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 16:15, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 17:24, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 17:25, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - informative list that includes significant information over a category. I see no reason for deletion. TerriersFan (talk) 17:34, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: While this list (as its own article) is a bit too short for my liking, if the list can be expanded with named bridges and tunnels (see Wikipedia:Features of streets, roads, and highways), it should remain. Let's be clear, though, that deleting an article that is a list of features is not the same as deleting an article about a single road feature. Individual road features deserve their own articles if they are named. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 17:55, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - individual items in a list don't have to be notable to make the list as a whole notable, and the concept as a whole (major road features in a sufficiently large area) is, in my opinion, notable in most cases, including this one. --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:39, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- But individual items in a list do have to be notable to be on the list. Duffbeerforme (talk) 17:20, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Useful navigation list, just like the dozens of others like it —G716 <^T·_C> 19:09, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Appropriate list, and, by the by, most named bridges and tunnels are indeed individually notable as is our consistent practice here .DGG (talk) 04:14, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep No valid reason for the deletion of this list has been given. Multiple entrys on the list appear to be notable. Many bridges and tunnels are notable. see Sydney Harbour Bridge as an example of a very notable bridge. Duffbeerforme (talk) 17:20, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep individual entries on a list do not need to be notable in themselves, just verifiable. The the list needs to be encyclopaedic and, like all the other lists of bridges and tunnels by country on Wikipedia, this is. Thryduulf (talk) 19:39, 16 June 2009 (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.