Deletion of American entry into Canada by land (2nd nomination)

Comment: per  relative to around 8k of page views per month. Deletion of this article would not serve Wikipedia's s functionally
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Ignore all rules (WP:IAR||WP:READER)

Comment: Yes, people look at this article— and they shouldn't. They should be reading the primary sources on the US and Canadian official websites, where the information will be accurate and up-to-date and presumably not subject to passing vandals and ignoramuses. Look, this is one big ball of  and . It doesn't matter how well-cited it is; it needs to be deleted
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTHOWTO||WP:NOTTRAVEL)

Comment: The mere ''number'' of references an article has is not an inclusion criterion in and of itself — an article that cites just ''one'' reference can be kept if that reference properly verifies passage of a must-include SNG such as being president of a country, and an article that cites ''100'' references can be deleted if they're all blogs. As necessary as sourcing is, it's just part of the overall keepability equation, not the be-all and end-all in and of itself. The problem here is that this isn't so much an encyclopedia article ''about'' crossing the border as a how-to guide ''to'' crossing the border: but how-to guides are covered by  as a thing Wikipedia isn't for. Nominator is entirely correct that something like this would belong on Wikivoyage, not here
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTHOWTO)

Comment: The way the page reads is not a reason to bring the matter here because |AfD is not cleanup.  The topic is notable because there are numerous books about it including the following
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:NOTCLEANUP)