Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Numbered highways in Amenia (CDP), New York

Numbered highways in Amenia (CDP), New York

5 articles

County Route 81 (Dutchess County, New York)

I know its kind of strange, but I like it - it took a little while to do this one, but it turned out really well. I am open to all comments.Mitch32^{(Go Syracuse)} 15:09, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 16:36, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose - I think the scope of this topic probably constitutes cherrypicking by scope reduction (from a topic for the whole of Dutchess County). I know the main article is an FL but I have no idea how that managed to happen, there's nothing listy about it, it's simply a summary style article of four other articles, and (unsurprisingly!) very short at that - rst20xx (talk) 17:37, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It isn't cherry picking. And, as far as I am concerned, this was more to split a topic on Amenia (CDP), New York, which could have too much of a broad scope, not dutchess county itself. (Meaning this isn't following the others).Mitch32^{(Go Syracuse)} 22:16, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I guess then I'm at a loss as to why a hamlet of 1100ish people deserves an article on the roads going through it! Seems like it's not notable to merit an article separately from one on the roads in the whole county - rst20xx (talk) 23:08, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia isn't really about what deserves an article. The list is well-sourced, thus establishing notability. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 23:14, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Question - I am going to ask again, how is a +300 miles highway a SUBtopic in the topic of "roads going through a hamlet of ~1000 people"? Nergaal (talk) 17:43, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This cannot be solved, you know that well enough.Mitch32^{(Go Syracuse)} 22:16, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support - The scope of this topic does seem strange, but since the main list on which the topic is based managed to become featured, I have a hard time opposing this topic. Rreagan007 (talk) 21:35, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Rreagan007. Z gin der 2009-02-05T18:50Z (UTC)
Support - meets WP:WIAFT.--TRU CO 18:11, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Close with consensus to promote - rst20xx (talk) 13:18, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]