Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tourism in Colorado Springs

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 merge to Colorado Springs, Colorado. Courcelles 05:23, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tourism in Colorado Springs[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is simply a travel guide. It is also highly promotional and not written in a neutral tone. I would suggest merging or redirecting. ~~JHUbal27 00:59, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Colorado-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:52, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:52, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect This article is a part of the larger article, and redirect and merger would typically be discussed on the talk pages of the affected articles. The nomination cites WP:NPOV and two WP:NOT issues, but then concludes with a "suggestion", leaving an AfD deletion argument as an exercise for the reader. The more I look at the article, the more I have to conclude that this article falls into the category of "worthless". There has been no attempt for the six years of the article history to WP:V source the content. The first sentence does not define the topic, reducing the sense that the topic is getting an academic treatment. A talk page comment from 2007 astutely states, "it should be expanded to include more information on the economic impact of tourism, not just the attractions." The article is written by people trying to improve the encyclopedia, one unsourced assertion at a time. WP:V doesn't literally require the existence of sources, it requires verifiability, so the statement, "The beautiful natural scenery attracts a lot of tourism in Colorado Springs..." doesn't necessarily require a citation. But without a citation, readers have reason to think "according to whom?" Those pictures add greatly to the article, but are they specific to the topic, or are they hanging on a WP:COATRACK? Why are there seven musical organizations listed here? IMO, the material about the history of sanitariums, instead of being interesting reading, is an annoying reminder that without inline citations, the material is a personal blog whose reliability can only be verified with a complete rewrite. I don't see a need to delete the edit history. Unscintillating (talk) 03:19, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spinning Spark 15:18, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Colorado Springs, do not delete page, without prejudice to reversal by any editor if this content can be verified. DavidLeighEllis (talk) 23:18, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect to Colorado Springs. Clearly notable material, but doesn't probably merit its own article. Steven Walling • talk 03:35, 15 April 2013 (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.