Deletion of Webster Avenue Bridge

Comment: to an appropriate article (e.g. Port Washington Branch) per  and . The bridge is not architecturally notable per  and it's not even a bridge, just an overpass over the Port Washington Branch. Its main claim to fame is that it is being replaced right now. In the "Description" section, the main reference used is a wiki (bridgehunter.com) and the only sources in that section that ''aren't'' bridgehunter are used to describe the location of the overpass. That is not enough to demonstrate its notability, as it is very easy to find sources that demonstrate where something is located. The first part of the history section doesn't really give me confidence either as numerous overpasses were built across this line around the same time. https://www.nytimes.com/1898/06/24/archives/long-island-railroad-the-branch-from-great-neck-to-port-washington.html Source 6 doesn't mention the overpass at all, only that the line opened, and sources https://manhassetpress.com/webster-avenue-bridge-noise-is-back/ 5 and https://www.amodernli.com/project/webster-avenue-bridge-rehabilitation/ 7 are primarily about the current bridge rehabilitation.{{pb}}That said, the main issue why this bridge appears notable is because of the damage identified in 1979 and the subsequent repairs in the late 20th and early 21st centuries. However, per , this could adequately be described in another page, like the Port Washington Branch page. Merely needing repairs and spanning a railroad line does not make a bridge unique per . Looking through newspapers.com and ProQuest, most of the search results seem to discuss either repairs, crashes, or traffic reports, which doesn't give me confidence in the subject's notability
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NBUILD||WP:NOTNEWS||WP:MILL)

Comment: Wikipedia is  and the rationale "We can't have articles for every bridge over a train line in an encyclopedia." just isn't a valid reason for deleting an article. If there are adequate sources to write an article, why not go ahead and write it
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTPAPER)