Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Denham Roundabout

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. No arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:08, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Denham Roundabout

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

It's a road junction, yes a slightly unusual one but others of the same type exist, not significantly notable. ZoeL (talk) 10:37, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: it's the end of a major motorway and only the magic roundabout (I know of) which is connected to a motorway, making it notable in my opinion. Oliver Fury, Esq. message • contributions 14:25, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Notability is not a matter of opinion, the article contains no reliable third party sources that give significant coverage to the roundabout. ZoeL (talk) 14:56, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:41, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:41, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep' as a major intersection, but additional sources needed and should be available. DGG ( talk ) 03:07, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep is an intersection of notable roads that seems notable in itself. Dew Kane (talk) 04:19, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I'm not enamoured of the view that features of local geography are automatically notable. It doesn't find any direct support in wikipedia policy, and nor does a blanket presumption serve the interests of verifiability for features that lack coverage in reliable sources. However, WP:GNG should be applied sensibly: significant is an elastic adjective that can be stretched for uncontroversial subject matter and tightened for subjects like BLPs. In this case, I think there is enough, particularly the coverage that appears to exist in the first source on this gbook list, which appears quite reliable: [1]. --Mkativerata (talk) 06:15, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- Motorway junctions are notable. Were this merely a suburban roundabout, it ought certainly to have been deleted. Peterkingiron (talk) 20:30, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I would add to that this is much more notable than your average motorway junction. Of course this is original research, so I won't accompany my statement with a bolded "keep", but I know from personal experience that this junction is very well known to the millions of drivers who live in West and North-West London and the nearby parts of Buckinghamshire, Berkshire and Hertfordshire, and was notable even before it became a motorway junction when the M40 was built. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:40, 11 April 2010 (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.