Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bradford Bypass

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) 00:04, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bradford Bypass

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

Article is purely speculative at this point. ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 00:09, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:56, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:57, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This article has been nominated for rescue. Silver seren^C 03:36, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I have tagged this article for rescue. Silver seren^C 03:36, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There is a considerable amount of coverage for the bypass. Even if it is just proposed, there is enough coverage that I believe it is notable. Silver seren^C 03:36, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep even though this is a crystal ball article, seems like there is plenty of sourcing available. Dew Kane (talk) 04:00, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep agree with dew kane crystal but plenty of sourcing out there Mikyt90 (talk) 15:29, 7 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.