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 delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:57, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Romano-British road names (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • Stats)

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

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Cliff Smith 18:29, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Cliff Smith 18:29, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article is mostly unreferenced, and possibly original research. The reason I'd prefer to delete this rather than merge / redirect to Roman roads in Britain is because I can't imagine anybody accidentally typing the article name into the search box. Ritchie333 (talk) 10:52, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete This doesn't add anything to Roman roads in Britain. I'm indifferent about whether to redirect: it may be very slightly useful to keep but not very. --Colapeninsula (talk) 11:29, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Ambivalent I originally moved the text (can't recall where from) rather than delete it, while reorganising the categories, as I thought it was a useful list. But I have no view on whether it really is useful. Bards (talk) 15:32, 26 July 2012 (UTC) (article creator)[reply]

• Delete This OR-ish piece provides poorer and less well supported coverage of the facts than Roman roads in Britain and Ancient_trackway#Great_Britain which between them leave little room for more articles on the topic. Effectively this is an unsupported POV/content fork bordering on speculation ("There are no records of names used by the Romano-British for their roads"). There's also OR-ish confusion between British and (Anglo-)Saxon, i.e. English. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:07, 26 July 2012 (UTC) Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:57, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete There's not much to say about the names of the roads, and what the article does say is unsourced. If there's a need for a separate list article, it can come from the list in Roman roads in Britain, which is more complete. I would be interested though in hearing from the article's creator. I see the creator is User:Bardsandwarriors, who has already spoken here. --Amble (talk) 20:34, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge or redirect into Roman roads in Britain per the above discussion. This is something of a POV fork of the other article, and adds little to the encyclopedia that is not already here. Bearian (talk) 22:38, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete (or redirect). This adds nothing to what should appear in Roman roads in Britain. This is not plain WP:OR as some later road names (such as street) are indicators that the road was paved at an early date, but "gate" and "way" have no such significance. The Saxons seem to have used way for a lesser (unpaved) track. A dyke is a ditch, though it is sometimes applied to the bank made with spoil from the ditch. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:49, 28 July 2012 (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.