Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bangkok Monorail

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 keep. ffm 18:09, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Bangkok Monorail

Bangkok Monorail (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

The monorail in question is not an actual transport system, but an amusement park ride. See "Bangkok amusement monorail fire. (6/26/02)" at http://www.monorails.org/tmspages/archive071402.html . Paul_012 ^(talk) 09:29, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

To clarify the reason for deletion, the subject fails WP:N, as stated in my comment below. So far, no reliable sources confirming its notability have been established. The article itself seems to be based on this very short mention at http://www.subways.net/thailand/bangkok.htm , which I have trouble accepting as a reliable source (not least because it seemingly fails to recognise that Fashion Island is the shopping mall in question and location of the mostly-indoor amusement park rather than an actual island). Also, per WP:NOT#NEWS, the incident itself may not merit inclusion in Wikipedia, save perhaps mention in Incidents at independent parks. --Paul_012 ^(talk) 07:48, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

• Keep, news search finds 218 hits for bangkok and monorail; also finds 9 hits for "Fashion Island" and monorail. Also, I believe the nominator is incorrect in his assumptions, since multiple sources claim that the monorail goes between a shopping mall and the amusement part (as also stated in the above article), making it public transport. Arsenikk ^(talk) 10:31, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

• Keep. No real reason for deletion given in the nomination, and as noted by Arsenikk, the reason is probably incorrect as well. Even if it was an amusement park ride, Disneyland Monorail would be in the same situation. Coverage of the monorail is already provided in the article. Sjakkalle (Check!) 10:43, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Sorry for not having been clearer. The subject of the article fails WP:N; The news in the mentioned link is the only reference I could find about the incident, which has the incident rather than the monorail itself as the primary subject. Almost all search results referring to a Bangkok monorail are misnomers of the BTS Skytrain, an elevated train system, or discussions on future non-existent projects. The nine Google News results are from the Los Angeles Times and concern a different, unrelated subject. I don't know what the "multiple sources" Arsenikk mentioned refers to. The amusement park is in the shopping mall, so it cannot be considered a public transport more than the Disneyland Monorail is. That said, the Disneyland Monorail is notable because it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. The subject of this article is not. --Paul_012 ^(talk) 11:23, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

• Keep or redirect info to the shopping mall - Notable ride. Just needs expanding and altering to avoid implying it is a public transport operating system. I'd suggest mergin it into the shopping mall article The Bald One ^{White cat} 11:28, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment as far as I can see, there is no article on the shopping mall. Or is there? Arsenikk ^(talk) 11:41, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

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.