Deletion of Münsterstraße (street in Dortmund)

Comment: meets , a historically important road of Dortmund and district being "an important Hanseatic League|Hanseatic trade route", from https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%BCnsterstra%C3%9Fe_(Dortmund) German wikiarticle that has numerous |sources contributing to its notability
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GEOROAD||WP:RS)

Comment: Per nom and WP:run-of-the-mill|run-of-the-mill city street. The article states, ''"Münsterstraße is a typical downtown district of a large city with a dense population."'', and that sums it up. Wikipedia is  |not a street or travel guide. There is nothing that is "worthy of notice" on an international scale (probably not local either) to be "just another street listing". Although Wikipedia may have unlimited "space" I am sure we don't need a listing of every street in every town (here and abroad) or that the German Wikipedia may seek or allow. "If" we could get our best writers to build this article to FA status (we can't but just saying) it would still be a typical street and the always argued  would mean this "typical street" scenario would also have to be rehashed over and over. I have a nice street near me with a beautiful and notable lake on one side, an historical district on the other, and a Capital One Tower|"skyscraper" (22 floors). It has some cool stores and older buildings. Listing the street would still amount to an |indiscriminate listing of "just a street" because |''not everything'' needs to be included in an encyclopedia.  Try to add the street to the Dortmund article and see how that works. If it does then it would have a relevant home
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTGUIDE||WP:OTHER||WP:INDISCRIMINATE||WP:NOTEVERYTHING)

Comment: While others are talking about philosophies and who offended whom, I added 3 4 reputable literature and 2 3 web |sources. I'm looking forward to read the first ''It's all crap'' statements, but on the other hand we could finally find a common sense to end this senseless discussion
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: without a doubt. The street clearly meets  with significant coverage in multiple reliable sources. The German article calls it "one of the oldest and most historically significant streets in Dortmund", the eighth-largest city in Germany. That article has several pages of high-quality content, and 31 citations. The street has coverage in news media, travel, and history books, Dortmund Tourism has produced a https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3d0FwILV6h8 video guide to the street, and the street has its own website at https://www.muensterstr.de produced by the neighborhood's ''Interessengemeinschaft Münsterstraße'' (community association of Münsterstrasse). Even the nominator admits the German Wikipedia article shows that the subject is notable. However, statements like "the article is definitely not notable in its current shape" are mistaken - the question of notability is purely whether the subject itself is notable or not, which is unrelated to how well or poorly the article is written or sourced - see . If it is established that the subject meets the notability guidelines by the existence of coverage in reliable sources, non-notability cannot be an argument to delete the article. Possible , too few citations, or poor-quality writing, are ''content issues'' that must be solved through the appropriate procedures including talk page discussion and good faith effort to improve the article. There is  for that. Deletion of the page and its edit history via AfD is not an appropriate method to address content issues
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:ASSERTN||WP:PROMOTION||WP:NODEADLINE)

Comment: WP:NOTTRAVEL|Wikipedia is not a travel guide nor a place for an |indiscriminate collection of un-of-the-mill street listings. This mundane listing is supported by four sources of which three are from the same |primary source that count as one for |notability.  |Having sources does not give automatic inclusion rights. |GNG states: ''" If a topic has received '''significant coverage''' in '''|reliable sources''' that are '''ndependent sources|independent of the subject''', it is '''presumed''' to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list."'', and this "street" '''fails GNG'''. Notability in the English Wikipedia|Notability in the English Wikipedia is determined by ''"gained sufficiently significant attention '''by the world at large''' and over a period of time as evidenced by significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the topic."''. There is nothing '''"Worthy of notice"''' to the world at large about a city street as every town and city has them
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:INDISCRIMINATE||WP:R||WP:PRIMARY||WP:VNOTSUFF||WP:GNG||WP:I||WP:notability||WP:reliable sources)