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 on the issue of "keep vs delete", no consensus on the issue of a merge/redirect. That can be discussed on the article's talk page. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:24, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

State Route 40 (New South Wales) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Non-notable road. Was possibly created due to the same topic facing an AFD at Simple English Wikipedia. PROD declined by article's creator Purplebackpack89≈≈≈≈ 22:14, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. — Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 23:26, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as precedent has determined time and time again that state or national highways are notable for coverage. In this case, let the article have a chance to be researched and developed beyond a single paragraph. Imzadi 1979 → 02:24, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Imzadi1979. Dough4872 02:32, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - A major route in New South Wales. Per convention as noted by Imzadi1979. Facing deletion in Simple English Wikipedia is not reason to delete an article. --Oakshade (talk) 05:19, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Had you read the Simple English discussion, you might have come to the conclusion I did that this article was created solely to stave off deletion of the Simple English one, which is not acceptable. Also, none of you have addressed the problem that the article is still unsourced Purplebackpack89≈≈≈≈ 05:37, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The blue shield actually indicates it is not a major route - considering it's entirely within Sydney, it's not even a Metroad. Compare Great Western Highway. Orderinchaos 21:45, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 13:38, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: This is redundant to Bells Line of Road. Should be redirected there Purplebackpack89≈≈≈≈ 17:41, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to Victoria Road, Sydney and Bells Line of Road where applicable. Unlike in other countries, state route numbers are not significantly used in Australia as an identifier - per WP:UCN it should be located with the road name. Orderinchaos 21:39, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect Like User:Purplebackpack89 said, it should be redirected to Bells Line of Road. Since you nominated the article, I think you should be able to just withdraw the nomination and do the redirect, but I'm not 100% positive on the procedure to redirect once an article has been AFD'd.
• Merge per User:Orderinchaos. Route numbers, while they exist, are not particularly widely used in Australia, and the far more common practice is to refer to the road's name instead. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 00:58, 29 May 2011 (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.