Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Front Range Urban Corridor
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. (non-admin closure) Logan Talk Contributions 00:08, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Front Range Urban Corridor (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This entire page is original research. The only references are raw census data and the definition of statistical areas. There is no references to the use of the term. No references to indicate the notability of the term (i.e. whether it is widely used or recognized). --Trödel 12:44, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: Google gives about 227,000 references to the term "Front Range Urban Corridor". This article was created on November 29, 2006, and is rated B-class, Mid-importance by both WikiProject Colorado and WikiProject Wyoming. This can hardly be considered original research. Yours aye, Buaidh 16:38, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Colorado-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 17:39, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wyoming-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 17:39, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep The nomination fails WP:BEFORE, as it takes very little effort to find uses of the term. Just by clicking the links next to "find sources" above, I quickly found that the term is in widespread use by both local and national news organizations, is used in numerous scholarly articles, including several published by the USGS, and appears in many books on geology. TheCatalyst31 Reaction•Creation 06:22, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep I don't think the article rates the B class rating it has (maybe a start class though). --Kumioko (talk) 17:14, 10 June 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.