Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rare Stone Museum

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 speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Jtrrs0 (talk) 20:15, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rare Stone Museum[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)

The museum does not seem to be notable enough. I cannot read Thai so the only source cited is not accessible to me but I do not believe it meets the GNG or the specific WP:NONPROFIT that might apply to it because, as far as I can appreciate, it is only local and has not received substantial coverage in multiple sources. I would also note that its potential lack of notability was the source of an issue template back in August 2017 that has yet to be resolved. See below Jtrrs0 (talk) 14:38, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Museums and libraries-related deletion discussions. Jtrrs0 (talk) 14:38, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Jtrrs0 (talk) 14:38, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Thailand-related deletion discussions. Jtrrs0 (talk) 14:38, 23 March 2021 (UTC) Withdrawn by nominator.[reply]

Keep Book sources exist and online. Can be expanded.† Encyclopædius 17:03, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - per sources added by Encyclopaedius. I also added one (it's in Thai), there's quite a few hits on Google if one searches under the time name for the museum. Meets WP:GNG. Netherzone (talk) 17:20, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Seems to have sufficient sourcing, which is being improved as we speak. The article is short but respectable and provides a reasonable amount of education on the subject that points in the direction of the subject having enough written on it to be notable. Vaticidalprophet 17:54, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, a viable stub with enough sourcing to meet WP:ORG. StarM 18:46, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, There are enough sources to meet [[WP:GNG and WP:ORG. Grailcombs (talk) 19:03, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Having seen all the sources and massive improvement I agree with it's notability and the viability of the article. Thanks for your help and many apologies for not having been able to find the sources myself! Jtrrs0 (talk) 20:09, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The sources amount to a handful of mentions in little-known travel guides. The one Thai cite is a dead link. If there are valid book citations, where are they? A interesting oddity and perfect for Wikivoyage. It may be a labour of love, but it's also a money-making scheme at 150 baht admission. Seligne (talk) 20:19, 23 March 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.