Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Monster Skatepark

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 07:23, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Monster Skatepark[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)

Fails WP:NORG. Local facility with no claims of notability other than a fire. Rogermx (talk) 21:36, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:32, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:32, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

keep edited, verified with reliable sources, notability was established in the existing citations. cygnis insignis 01:50, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- It would seem to me that its only claim to notability would be as an Olympic venue. Are Olympic venues automatically notable? Would like to hear more opinions on this Rogermx (talk) 02:16, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Two options, withdraw your third nomination in around quarter of an hour, one minute after editing another article. recalibrate and use your ability to discriminate real world notability, eg. the references to this facility versus a rationale Removed notability tag - if it ran on a major television network, it is notable. is the first option. The second option is that I begin to advise you on the pros and cons of AfD, and the prerequisites, diligence, propriety, and onus on those whose propose an article is nominated on, seemingly, less than a minutes examination and proceeds to contradict my contribution to the article with the above response. cygnis insignis 03:39, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

- - The vast majority of articles that I have proposed for AfD have been ultimately deleted, so I don't think that I will require any coaching, thank you. The references for this article concern the fire; are we to have articles about every place that burns down simply because it got a lot of local news coverage? Finally, suggest you refresh yourself on WP:NOTBATTLE.
Weak keep I could not see any specific significant coverage but there is wide spread sustained coverage, a bit more the just mentions, from a wide range of sources, most of which on face value seem to have some degree of independence. Aoziwe (talk) 11:35, 7 April 2019 (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.