Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of public signage typefaces

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.

The result was speedy keep (snow)‎. (non-admin closure) NM 12:10, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

List of public signage typefaces

List of public signage typefaces (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Trivial. Fails WP:NLIST. Could not find a single realible source that discusses public signage typefaces in a group. Esolo5002 (talk) 20:57, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:22, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

While this article clearly needs a lot more citations (books, governmental sources) the theory of someone trying to replicate a look / appearance of a road sign and wanting a single source of information is pretty sound. Are art resources trivial?

In a perfect world, I think the model of this page would be something like the "Lists of Colors" pages. 69.124.168.78 (talk) 22:26, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology and Transportation. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:26, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep No! This is a good list that adds value to Wikipedia. Zanahary (talk) 01:25, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep A cursory search in Google Scholar and Books reveals numerous sources discussing signage typefaces as a group. PaulT2022 (talk) 02:13, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Can you provide those sources. Not saying they don't exist but I couldn't find them. Esolo5002 (talk) 06:06, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • https://www.google.com/search?q="signage+typeface"…
  • https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q="signage+typeface"…

  Practically all first-page results are on topic. PaulT2022 (talk) 09:42, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. This list serves a clear navigational purpose. Aaiqbal (talk) 05:33, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The whole topic of navigational signage and fonts is deep and extensive. Once upon a time there was Johnston (typeface) (London Underground) and then half a century later the huge influence of Transport (typeface), Motorway (typeface) and Rail Alphabet drawn by Margaret Calvert; with similar stories of regimented font use in other lands: DIN 1451 / SNV (typeface) / Trafikkalfabetet. The article/list could benefit from a solid proper introduction at the top, and adding of contextual dates throughout the table (allowing sorting by year). Perhaps the huge font samples swatches on the right could be slimmed down to single lines or actual real world photographs of horizontal signs to give better context to readers.
  TL;DR; keep, and expand. —Sladen (talk) 10:01, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. This list can be improved and serves an educational purpose.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 11:15, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Typography for signage and wayfaring is a specialist discipline, that had demands that differ from typical typography in that they need to readable at distance and at speeds, and cover a much larger range of sizes. This has resulted in type faces designed specifically for this purpose.

See: Typography Best Practices, some books on the subject, from Google Scholar: Signage and Wayfinding Design: A Complete Guide to Creating Environmental Graphic Design Systems, Signage Design Manual, Edo Smitshuijzen Wayfinding: Designing and Implementing Graphic Navigational Systems

Transport Design Manuals are prized by some and have been reprinted as collectors items eg British Rail Corporate Identity Manual Design Manual for the Swiss Federal Railways Tallus (talk) 16:18, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: The above responses have established that 1) that the subject of this list has been "discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources", and 2) that this list does serve an "informational" purpose, meaning that this page does not fail WP:NLIST. — Jamie Eilat (talk) 20:09, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep pretty clear that sources exist, the article will need cleanup but this is one instance I think that deletion is not cleanup applies. Possible speedy keep? microbiologyMarcus ^{(petri dish•growths)} 21:41, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: this was posted on a tweet by Depths of Wikipedia so I immagine there are a lot of eyeballs on this quickly. microbiologyMarcus ^{(petri dish•growths)} 21:43, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Other way around. If you check the timestamps, the tweet happened first, and the nominator almost surely saw the Tweet. So this wasn't a case of canvassing support, but rather the nominator AFD'ing a page they themselves saw on Depths of Wiki, presumably. SnowFire (talk) 04:08, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep A perfectly valid navigational list as well as a valid information list. Dream Focus 15:22, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per all above. Perhaps a WP:SNOWBALL is going to start rolling? S5A-0043^Talk 16:40, 25 November 2023 (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.