Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Krzesin Landscape Park

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 no consensus‎. Initial participants disagreed about the standard of notability to apply, and there was no further participation after two relists. RL0919 (talk) 16:13, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Krzesin Landscape Park[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)

Non-notable landscape park stub with no references, even the Polish version has only 2 references with none of them being independent and one of the references doesn't even work. Fails WP:GNG Crainsaw (talk) 11:01, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. Crainsaw (talk) 11:01, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete cannot find sources to establish notability — Karnataka ^talk 12:34, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:41, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I don't know about you, but in my country, an 85 square km park is a big park, especially in densely populated Europe. This satellite image gives a sense of just how big it is -- is the large forested area in the middle between different villages. There's a 92 hectare area in the middle that's the Rezerwat przyrody Młodno ("Młodno Nature Reserve"), a protected peat bog.

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 22:43, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, this official government link to a page about the park is sufficient to establish notability per the special requirements of "Notability (geographic features)". It's legal recognition by the government. It does not have to be independent of the government since this is a geographic article.

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 22:53, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:38, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dusti ^{*Let's talk!*} 15:19, 16 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.