List of traffic circles in New Jersey: Let'srun ( talk ) 17:20, 15 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture , Transportation , Lists ,  and New Jersey .  Let'srun ( talk ) 17:20, 15 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep In addition to the several relevant sources already in the article demonstrating notability of traffic circles and their connection to the state of New Jersey and showing that "it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources" as required by WP:LISTN , there's also "Love or hate highway traffic circles, N.J. is the reason they exist. You’re welcome." in NJ.com (the website of The Star-Ledger ), "NJ’s hated traffic circles are on the way out" , from WKXW , "All About Roundabouts" in The New York Times , "South Jersey: How roundabouts impact traffic, transportation" , in The Daily Journal , and "CASEY: Should New Jersey get the blame for right-of-way confusion in roundabouts?" , in the faraway Roanoke Times blaming New Jersey for traffic circle confusion in Virginia.  Yes, this meets the notability standard for lists.  Alansohn ( talk ) 17:43, 15 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per the coverage shown above by Alansohn.  Left guide ( talk ) 18:57, 15 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep and move to Traffic circles in New Jersey as suggested below.  Left guide ( talk ) 06:17, 17 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as per the other list of roundabouts in state - this appears to be WP:OR .  SportingFlyer T · C 19:07, 15 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I'm not sure what is original research here in this article being discussed or how this article relates to others, but there are plenty of reliable and reliable sources in the article and available elsewhere, as listed above.  Are you sure that the issues you cite can only be addressed by deleting the article and not by editing it?  Alansohn ( talk ) 21:12, 15 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Agreed, as per the other list of roundabouts in state is a textbook WP:OSE argument.  Whether pages like List of traffic circles in Wyoming and List of traffic circles in Vermont exist depend entirely on the sourcing that is or isn't available for their respective topics, and have absolutely no relevance to this page.  Left guide ( talk ) 21:29, 15 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per the list of sources provided by Alansohn.  Yes, this list does need a lot of work, but the topic of NJ traffic circles has been described as a group (e.g. The Horrible New Jersey Traffic Circle. Why Do They Still Exist? in 105.7 The Hawk, this study on Conflicts at Traffic Circles in New Jersey ).  The main issue is the fact that NJ doesn't count the exact number of traffic circles, but the FHWA does acknowledge that they were (at least one point) used widely - in fact, more than in any other state.  – Epicgenius ( talk ) 00:22, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I think my issue is I could use similar sources to justify a list of roundabouts in England article, but I have absolutely no idea how that would be encyclopaedic.  The fact you say New Jersey doesn't count the number of roundabouts does demonstrate this is WP:OR .  SportingFlyer T · C 09:22, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I wouldn't be surprised if there's sufficient sourcing to establish notability for a List of roundabouts in England article, but again that's not relevant to this discussion .  And as long as we aren't stating in wikivoice that "New Jersey has x amount of roundabouts", I don't see how such OR violations would occur.  There is sourcing available for this as a cohesive topic as well as the {{ dynamic list }} template to accommodate uncertainty on the tally.  Furthermore, WP:NLIST doesn't require an exact sourced count as part of its notability criteria.  Left guide ( talk ) 09:37, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I just don't think because one article has photos of 12 roundabouts that we need to have a list of all of the roundabouts in the state.  SportingFlyer T · C 10:07, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] As Left guide says, an exact count isn't needed to meet WP:NLIST —that's why dynamic lists may exist.  According to NLIST, "The entirety of the list does not need to be documented in sources for notability, only that the grouping or set in general has been."  It would only be OR if we did count the number of traffic circles in this article's table and said "NJ has XYZ number of traffic circles".  But to avoid that, we can choose to include only traffic circles that are described as such in a reliable source.  – Epicgenius ( talk ) 15:34, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] (I also support moving this page to Traffic circles in New Jersey , but this also implies that the page is kept.) – Epicgenius ( talk ) 00:50, 17 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep 25 references in the article already, and Category:Traffic circles in New Jersey exist.   Lists are always more useful than categories since additional information can be listed.   Sources have also been found talking about these as a group.  D r e a m Focus 10:10, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep As shown above & in article, satisfies Wikipedia:LISTN , thus GNG.  Djflem ( talk ) 19:56, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Maybe useful or interesting (not offered as NLIST or GNG) Sisto, Rich De SistoRich De (July 22, 2021).  "The Horrible New Jersey Traffic Circle. Why Do They Still Exist?" .  105.7 The Hawk .  Franco, Judi FrancoJudi (January 24, 2024).  "How to navigate a NJ traffic circle in 5 simple steps" .  New Jersey 101.5 .  "NJ Still Has Silly Rotary Rules" .  www.jefftk.com .  https://onlinepubs.trb.org/Onlinepubs/trr/1991/1327/1327-009.pdf Operational Improvements at Traffic Circles (Final Report) December 2008 NJDOT and FHWA https://togethernorthjersey.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Roundabouts-v-circles-info-draft-5.21.19.pdf Thomas, Kayla ThomasKayla (October 15, 2019).  "New Jersey: Birthplace of the Traffic Circle" .  94.5 PST .  Djflem ( talk ) 20:07, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Move to Traffic circles in New Jersey ; lose the List.  James.folsom ( talk ) 17:26, 17 March 2024 (UTC) Delete The standards for sources used to establish notability are more stringent than the standards used for sources used as citations.  The sources discussed here are not of sufficient for establishing the the notability of this list.  There are also problems with significant coverage as well.  James.folsom ( talk ) 21:55, 16 March 2024 (UTC) , [ reply ] problems with significant coverage - Could you elaborate on this, please?  I see sources like this which do provide SIGCOV for the topic of traffic circles in New Jersey.  – Epicgenius ( talk ) 00:03, 17 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Move to Traffic circles in New Jersey ; lose the List.  I don't see how this is different than the results of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of roundabouts in Washington (state) .  What specific citations satisfy WP:NLIST for New Jersey?  "Traffic circles in STATE" are likely notable per the cited sources but I'm not seeing how a list of them is notable for the NJ citations but not the WA citations.  Would prefer to have consistent articles across states.  PK-WIKI ( talk ) 00:38, 17 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I wouldn't mind this outcome.  I've at least learned New Jersey has a bizarre relationship with roundabouts because of this...  SportingFlyer T · C 01:12, 17 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I'm open to this suggestion as well.  There do seem to be some useful sources provided here that would fit well in that type of article.  Let'srun ( talk ) 04:39, 17 March 2024 (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.

Discussion outcome: keep