Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Boston 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 no consensus. "Delete and merge" or "delete or move" aren't really interpretable positions. Article can be moved or merged according to editorial discretion. Chick Bowen 01:30, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Boston Bypass

Article subject was the idea of one man - the multi-billion project went on in spite of his efforts. Trivial mentions in the media MarkBul 03:56, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No attribution of the notability of this proposal to independent sources. Even if there is a source or two about it, I recommend adding a comment in the Big Dig article itself. Every major transportation project has critics and sometimes third parties propose alternatives but these are rarely notable unless they are proposed by influential groups and/or over a long period of time, such as the Crosstown Expressway (Chicago). --Dhartung | Talk 07:20, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Rename I would suggest we rename it to Vincent Zarrilli with some history about him, as he seems to be a prolific protestor/activist [1][2][3][4]. Fosnez 07:21, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Solarapex 12:36, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge what can be reliably sourced. The B.B., like "Scheme Z", was a relevant issue for the History of the Big Dig and the main Big Dig articles. The press coverage of the time is out there to find, at least on paper. • Gene93k 19:12, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Vincent Zarrilli per Fosnez. (change of vote). • Gene93k 16:46, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I nominated this one. The Big Dig was/is a multi-billion dollar project. Mr Zarrelli went around Boston putting his own printed posters on light poles and walls. He got some mention in the local media as a human interest story. His proposal was nutty - no one every thought of it seriously. Press coverage does not equal notability - he was a very minor news story that pased, like a cat that keeps climbing up the same tree. The Boston Bypass was certainly never relevant to the Big Dig - it was one guy's idea, followed by no serious interested parties. MarkBul 17:23, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- The coverage was more substantial than that. A search of the Boston Globe Archive (they want $$$) shows 11 articles including "Bridge-bypass Alternative To Plan For Central Artery Gets Support" - Feb 25, 1990, "Zarrilli Plan Enters the Fast Lane" - Dec 17, 1989, and "A Better Boston Bypass" - Dec 9, 1989. I also remember at least one opinion piece calling the B.B. problematic. People of the North End hated and feared the Big Dig. The Bypass had supporters there. • Gene93k 23:46, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CitiCat^♫ 04:55, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep or Merge. This article is a bit borderline. I like Fosnez's idea, to me it seems to be the best solution.Darkcraft 09:44, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete If you want a pottery manufacturer designing your highway, make sure he has a really big kiln. I agree with the original nominator that this appears to be the story of a guy. He's trying to "fight City Hall" with a complaint that the highway should be put somewhere else. Mandsford 16:29, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, the proposal doesn't seem to have ever been seriously considered by MassHwy, or really supported by anyone other than Zarrelli. Could be made into an article about him. —Scott5114 ↗ 17:40, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Move to Vincent Zarelli, per Scott5114, Fosnez, and Darkcraft--Victor falk 20:35, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or merge wherever appropriate (Big Dig or Zarelli). --Polaron | Talk 21:11, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - seems like extra unencyclopedic stuff master son^{T - C} 18:31, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Big Dig or History of the Big Dig, with appropriate redirect. -- Tckma 17:44, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the article, merge its contents where applicable per Polaron. --TMF ^{Let's Go Mets - Stats} 05:54, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge where appropriate. --NE2 17:05, 26 September 2007 (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.