Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jurassic Park Visitors Center (2nd nomination)

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. Singu larity 06:05, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jurassic Park Visitors Center[edit]

This article asserts no notability through referencing, and as such is just plot repetition from various Jurassic Park media. And the only significent real world coverage, the theme park with a real Jurassica park Visitors center, already has a significent section in another article, so this is duplicative. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 21:34, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, it appears not to have improved since its last nomination at AFD, showing further its lack of notability. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 21:36, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fancruft with no notability. Very well done, as such things go, but nevertheless... - Mdsummermsw (talk) 21:39, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I must admit that I was positively surprised to see Jurassic_Park_Visitors_Center#Real-life_Jurassic_Park_Visitors_Center and was ready to recommend a merge, but that section unfortuntely sounds like a travel guide with no independent notability. I suspect there is no Jurassic Park wiki, because this article would be great there. – sgeureka ^t•c 00:59, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, because even though the real-life place is based on the fictional one, there's no independence and thus no real real-world notability (and I suspect little WP:N notability as well). There is, btw, a Jurassic Park wikia compatible with the GFDL. --Dhartung | Talk 04:28, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep As pointed out by the last RFA, there is a precedent in place for fictional places in fictional works. An example of this would be Sunnydale High School. --Shark face 217 02:30, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I assume by precedent you mean "consensus", and consensus can change. There are important issues to thrash out in this review before we put this one to rest. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 19:33, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - There is no notability independent of the film for this location. -- Whpq (talk) 19:21, 18 December 2007 (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.