Talk:Central Connector

This article was nominated for deletion on 2006 June 12. The result of the discussion was no consensus to delete.

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles

Merge proposal[edit]

For crying out loud, while the author is trying to nitpick articles of existing roads (or roads that used to exist) to death, we have here a road that never existed! I was tempted to put it up for AfD, but on second thought, a merge to the article on the authority that proposed it in the first place would be more beneficial to Wikipedia and more appropriate. Let it be known, however, if this article for the nonexistent road comes up for AfD, I'll log in from home and push hard for its erasure. 147.70.242.39 00:16, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hahahahahahaha. Read [1]. A whole chapter of a book about the legal fight over the connector. Keep pulling your shit and I'll keep reverting. --SPUI (T - C - RFC - Curpsbot problems) 02:18, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, SPUI, for bringing this to my attention - and not just for your wonderful display of lack of civility. Dan is correct - the book is irrelevant to this discussion. The road never existed, and neither should this stand-alone article. How long would this last under AfD? Not long, I would suppose, given the AfDs for SR 300 and SR 678. If the reverting continues too long, we might get the answer to my question... and a few other "questionable" articles that have snuck under the banner of Florida State Roads. Shall we continue to swap threats as reversion after reversion continues, or shall we do what's best for Wikipedia and work together? B.Wind 04:42, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And SPUI, your point is (besides your declaration that you are determined to increase the intensity of your revert wars on multiple fronts without even trying to inject reason into the festivities)...? Wikipedia is not your fiefdom. It works by consensus of editors, not by one person proceeding as if Wikipedia is his own personal web site. 147.70.242.39 20:43, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If there is alot of information about this subject, and you believe that this information is reason enough to prevent the proposed merge, why don't you add said information instead of preventing the merge based on information not in the article? NHammen 21:55, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- Because nothing has been done over the past six with this article that is duplicated by a line in the proposed target for a merge, I redirected it. Please do not revert this until/unless you are expanding the original article at that time. 147.70.242.40 14:49, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]