Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Happy Halloween (Dreamworld)

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 delete. If a redirect is desired, one can be created (and perhaps contested) separately. Sandstein 07:15, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Halloween (Dreamworld)[edit]

[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)

Lacks notability. Sources to press releases repeated by sources of dubious importance/reliability, and to primary sources. Every theme park has these theme weeks, months, events, and they all announce them as something special. That doesn't mean that they actually get significant attention (i.e. beyond sources repeating or rehashing these press releases). Fram (talk) 12:30, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 12:30, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 12:30, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merge anything useful and sourced to Dreamworld (Australia) per WP:ATD. Deus et lex (talk) 23:01, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom: the current article lacks sources needed to establish notability, and there's no reason to assume that more/better sources exist. Nick-D (talk) 04:54, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - what about WP:ATD - why is a merge or redirect not inappropriate? Deus et lex (talk) 06:12, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - No objection, but this seems an unlikely search term. Nick-D (talk) 04:55, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    - The search term will probably be "Happy Halloween" so could be included on a disambig page or at the top of another main article. Deus et lex (talk) 10:45, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kieran207(talk-Contribs) 01:48, 9 April 2021 (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.