Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chohong Museum of Finance

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 with snow. (non-admin closure) CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} 21:59, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Chohong Museum of Finance

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

I think this museum is now defunct, and I can't find any mentions of it online in either English or Korean. toobigtokale (talk) 04:30, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Museums and libraries-related deletion discussions. toobigtokale (talk) 04:30, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - not able to find any sources, perhaps closed per nom. - Indefensible (talk) 04:39, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and expand from the corresponding article in Korean, ko:한국금융사박물관 Machine translation: https://ko-m-wikipedia-org.translate.goog/wiki/%ED%95%9C%EA%B5%AD%EA%B8%88%EC%9C%B5%EC%82%AC%EB%B0%95%EB%AC%BC%EA%B4%80?_x_tr_sl=ko&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp Eastmain (talk • contribs) 12:02, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Good find, thanks toobigtokale (talk) 18:18, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and rename. Seems to have sufficient notability. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:39, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Eastmain. Good find. The Korean wiki article is also unreferenced, but I found some coverage of the subject online including: https://sedaily.com/NewsView/268JMUKYQ3 and https://m.weekly.cnbnews.com/m/m_article.html?no=145524. - Indefensible (talk) 16:26, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance and South Korea. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:18, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Sources do exist on this.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:17, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Sources cited by Eastmain and Indefensible above appear to be sufficient to pass WP:GNG. Sal2100 (talk) 21:48, 17 August 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.