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.  Sandstein  17:43, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kreuz Oberhausen (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)

Was de-prodded with the comment, "needs afd". Just another interchange like thousands of others. Each interchange needs to be individually discussed on its own merits as to whether or not it passes GNG. This one clearly does not. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:25, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. sst✈^·discuss· 17:03, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. sst✈^·discuss· 17:03, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Nondescript cloverleaf interchange. Dough4872 17:14, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete—fails WP:GNG and does not warrant an article. Imzadi 1979 → 21:26, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy keep: This is one of a group of disruptive nominations for deletion by a small number of systemically biased editors who have a fixed agenda of wanting all articles about Autobahn interchanges in Germany to be deleted, even though they have carried out no research into whether the subjects of the articles pass WP:GNG or not, and are therefore contending that they fail GNG without regard to whether that contention is true or false. For that reason, this nomination, like all disruptive editing, should be treated as vandalism, and should be withdrawn. See also my more detailed comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kreuz Kaiserberg. Bahnfrend (talk) 18:43, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Please see WP:AGF and WP:NOTVAND. Note that "disruptive editing" is expicitly stated as not being vandalism. (And accusations of vandalism when no vandalism has in fact taken place are given a decidedly dim view.) - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 21:18, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Despite the accusation above, there is no WP:BIAS here, there is WP:NOTVAND, and there is no failure of WP:BEFORE (which was not stated but inferred). Every interchange on the Autobahn is named. Therefore, unlike in most other places, one cannot assume that a named intersection is an indication of something special and, therefore, probable notability - instead, it's WP:RUNOFTHEMILL. Interchanges are not things that are inherently notable; they have to rise and fall on GNG alone, and I'm not seeing how this (as with the vast majority of other Autobahn interchanges) does so. There is no bias, and there is no cabal, there is only notability, and this is how it fails. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 21:18, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – not every interchange is notable. sst✈ 03:33, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Response: Whether that's true or not, this is the interchange between two of Germany's oldest and busiest Autobahns, and also the starting point for the construction of the Autobahn that linked Germany's Autobahn system with the Netherlands. I have found further content for this article and will add it in the next 24 hours. Bahnfrend (talk) 10:30, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • Please remember that notability is not inherited; the fact that the two Autobahns are exceptionally notable has no bearing on whether or not the interchange is. However, the part about it being the starting point shows promise, and I'll keep an eye on it with a view to potentially changing my !vote if there's GNG-worthy stuff. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 00:17, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
      • Response: Yes, but of course an interchange between two important Autobahns is, all other things being equal, inherently more likely to generate coverage in reliable sources. I have been delayed in adding content, and will add it shortly, but in the meantime, here is one of the sources I have found - it's an article about, amongst other things, the opening ceremony of the first stage of the Autobahn to the Netherlands (which included a parade ending, and ribbon cutting and speeches, at this interchange and seems to have been quite an event). Bahnfrend (talk) 13:44, 2 January 2016 (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.