Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alabama State Fairgrounds

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 - there is no point continuing this AfD. - Richard Cavell (talk) 10:30, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alabama State Fairgrounds[edit]

I can't find any reliable sources that show notability in a Google search and a Google News search. Schuym1 (talk) 03:04, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Alabama-related deletion discussions. —Eastmain (talk) 03:35, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I added some references. There was probably significant coverage in local newspapers over the years that is only available in print, not online. -- Eastmain (talk) 03:35, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I also added a reference for the fact that the Fairgrounds were used to imprison arrested civil rights demonstrators. -- Eastmain (talk) 03:46, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep A state's fairgrounds are notable, even if it doesn't appear so on Google.Synchronism (talk) 03:51, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I would imagine that any state fairgrounds are pretty much notable. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 04:03, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as article now has multiple references, subject is historically significant, and while this article could use some work it's well clear of the threshold for notability. (Let it snow!) - Dravecky (talk) 04:31, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I think precedent has established that all state fairgrounds are notable by default, and the added refs certainly establish notability. Note to self: Update the fact that Birmingham International Raceway is moving away from the fairgrounds, and that Mayor Larry Langford has developed plans to redevelop the site. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 04:46, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep as per above, most especially TenPoundHammer's point as well as the reference Eastmain added. ~Pip 2 andahalf 05:50, 7 November 2008 (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.