Deletion of Kreuz Oldenburg-Ost

Comment: as written, this fails to meet 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: The article as-written doesn't demonstrate that  is met, but given the size of the project, its impact on the local area, and the creation of the associated artificial lake, it seems very likely that it was covered by reliable sources at the time when it was built.  doesn't explicitly mention intersections but it seems like a reasonable position to hold that a major named intersection between two notable highways would be subject to the same reasoning that makes the highways themselves presumptively notable. There is also the possibility of a cultural mismatch here; German editors (and readers) may have a completely different view of the notability of an intersection from the US-based editors who dominate these discussions, based on genuine historical and geographical factors. The tendency to name intersections and make them into parks does rather suggest that this is the case. All in all, I don't think it is possible to say that there is a clear "policy" or "precedent" argument here for either keeping or deleting, but I prefer the "keep" argument on the basis that the GNG could almost certainly be met if someone spent the time pouring over German newspaper archives from the late 70s
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:GEOROAD)

Comment: nbsp; See #Article content does not determine notability, which states, "Notability is a property of a subject and not of a Wikipedia article."&nbsp; Also see, #Notability guidelines do not apply to content within an article, which also dissociates wp:notability from content.&nbsp
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:N)

Comment: nothing in the lengthy rant above goes to show that this particular interchange passes . Searches show only trivial or routine mentions of the interchange
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: This is one of a group of Wikipedia:Disruptive editing|disruptive nominations for deletion by the two Wikipedia:Systemic bias|systemically biased editors above, who have a fixed agenda of wanting all articles about Autobahn interchanges in Germany to be deleted, even though they have carried out no research into whether the subjects of the articles pass  or not, and are therefore contending that they are all "non-notable" without regard to whether that contention is true or false.  For that reason alone, this nomination should be withdrawn or should fail.  See also my more detailed comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kreuz Kaiserberg
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)