Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Filbert Street (San Francisco)

Add links
Source: 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 no consensus. No prejudice against further discussion on renaming this article. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 19:10, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Filbert Street (San Francisco)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Filbert Street (San Francisco) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Filbert Street is an ordinary east-west street in San Franicisco and does not meet

WP:NGEO. An earlier article on Filbert Steps was merged into this one as superfluous - unfortunately, this was backwards, as Filbert Street itself is a non-notable feature. I would Propose to Merge, but that creates a redirect for "Filbert Street" to "Filbert Steps", which has its own set of problems. I am proposing to manually merge the content on Filbert Steps into another article, either Filbert Steps itself, or better, the Telegraph Hill, San Francisco article, with a newly added section on the step streets of Telegraph Hill, including the Filbert, Greenwich, and Vallejo steps. Peter G Werner (talk) 06:09, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Valley2city‽ 06:04, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:36, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. CptViraj (talk) 12:46, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, simply. IMHO the deletion nomination should not have been made. The nominator basically wishes to move the substantial topic back to Filbert Steps, from which it came (or from which the most notable info came). That should have been submitted as a
    wp:RM. Offhand, that doesn't make sense to do, because "Filbert Street" is the geographically larger topic and it is fine to cover Filbert Steps as a relatively huge section within that. Allowing for additions of more info about notable happenings, history, buildings, etc. at other places along Filbert Street which add to the notability of the street. But the reverse doesn't work, it doesn't make sense to be covering the street and various places along it, within an article about the steps. It is also logically possible to have two articles, as if Filbert Street is a historic district (and in fact it is, but not yet listed as such on the National Register of Historic Places) and Filbert Steps is an individual place (like a contributing building or object in an NRHP historic district, or like a place separately listed on the NRHP which happens to be within the district. In NRHP writing, it would never be done, to relegate a big historic district's coverage into a section of an article about one place in the district. Also, I think many long historic streets in San Francisco probably deserves explicit coverage eventually, either as an article or a section in a neighborhood or historic district article. --Doncram (talk) 22:28, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply
    ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:44, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Doncram, I'm curious about what content you think this article could have besides the Filbert Steps. In addition, what would the sources be for that content? As it stands, the article does not have any references for the street itself and I am not able to find any. Lamona (talk) 05:28, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well, one thing it could cover is registered historic places (which is what I edit most about in Wikipedia) along the street. At National Register of Historic Places listings in San Francisco, I don't see any places with Filbert address which are individually NRHP-listed. But do any of the historic districts in that list span Filbert? If so then there is detailed info available about Filbert buildings. Also there may be coverage of Filbert buildings in any City of San Francisco local historic registry program. Another thing I'd do is "take a walk" down the street in Google Streetview, and inspect for apparently notable monuments or other objects, buildings, etc. --Doncram (talk) 20:49, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
On this topic, yes, Filbert Street does have some historic buildings along the length of it, but that does not make the street notable in itself. (I know the street well, since I used to live on a perfectly ordinary block of Filbert in
Alamo Square Victorians and the site of the old Winterland Ballroom along it. Peter G Werner (talk) 22:48, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
Map all coordinates using OpenStreetMap

Download coordinates as:

Filbert Street: view to Telegraph Hill
Washington Sq., Filbert St., Sts. Peter & Paul Church
Old Vedanta Society Temple
@ Filbert & Webster
Okay, echoing those and adding a few more, please see numerous landmarks along Filbert Street all in a map by clicking on "Map of all coordinates using OpenStreetMap" to the right of this page. The several landmarks along the street, whose coordinates I have just identified and labelled, are:
And please compare this info to what's covered in Lombard Street article. That article has a table indentifying the street's end points and additional major intersections, which this could have too. It mainly (only?) talks about the one block with the curvy roadway, besides mentioning the intersections. The Lombard Street article has no landmarks besides intersections along the street.
I am not the one to write interesting text about these spots, but there's more to say than can comfortably be merged into Telegraph Hill (and much simply does not apply there). And I think this is adding up to be better than the Lombard Street article. --Doncram (talk) 01:13, 31 August 2022 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Filbert_Street_(San_Francisco)&oldid=1120739394"