Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tradition and Custom Museum

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. MBisanz talk 12:08, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tradition and Custom Museum[edit]

Tradition and Custom Museum (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

fails WP:ORG. found no coverage in Malay or English for its current or former name. the 2 sources provided merely confirm it exists. LibStar (talk) 03:55, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, obviously. Public museums are routinely kept in AFDs, including numerous AFDs opened by the current deletion nominator. It's a public attraction. It's a museum. It's a sensible public service for Wikipedia to provide info on museums, like we do for other repositories/sources of knowledge such as academic journals, newspapers, etc. As it is a museum, we know it is covered at least briefly in travel guides and other sources. And there will exist reviews of the museum when it originally opened and when there have been major renovations/changes/new exhibits, although we may not find those sources online. It is reasonable to believe that such sources exist. wp:AFDISNOTFORCLEANUP, but for those interested in developing the article nonetheless, try also:
--doncram 04:14, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
"It's a public attraction. It's a museum. It's a sensible public service for Wikipedia to provide info on museums". no, there is no inherent notability for museums. I have tried under those old names, you obviously didn't even bother to click the gnews search because it's zero results. your !vote is WP:MUSTBESOURCES. please provide actual evidence of sources instead of WP:ITSNOTABLE. LibStar (talk) 04:18, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Well for one thing, searching just by clicking on your "find sources" link doesn't work well. Try searching on "Alor Gajah" museum rather than "Alor Gajah Museum" works better.
  • It is covered in Lonely Planet guidebook, a very good one. "Malaysia, Singapore & Brunei - Page 254 - Google Books Result [1] / Simon Richmond - 2010 - ‎Travel: "Sights Right in Alor Gajah Square is the Museum of Custom and Tradition (admission RM1; h9am-5.30pm Wed-Thu&Sat&Sun, 9am-12.15pm&2.45-5.30pmFri), ..." and I can't see the rest of the information provided.
  • I saw a review which described it as having started pretty much as a local history museum, which later broadened to cover Malay culture. Sorry, i don't have the link now.
LibStar, your habit of responding ping-pong style to every comment which does not agree 100% with you is annoying. Please consider not replying to this comment, and not to other comments by other editors. --doncram 04:36, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
you cannot make another editor in an AfD to stop replying, you need to stop saying there are sources and actually list them in your first response, it's rather ping pong of you. and jumping to the conclusion that everything is suddenly inherently notable when it isn't. LibStar (talk) 04:40, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lonely Planet like any travel guide is hardly an advancer of notability, hotels also appear in Lonely Planet. travel guides tend to only prove the entity exists. and if Lonely Planet is the best source you can come up with it's hardly a case for notability. LibStar (talk) 04:40, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

trying to stifle someone who has an opposing view to you in an AfD, is it because you don't want your arguments contested? LibStar (talk) 04:43, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
a few lines in a 646 page travel guide hardly advances notability. LibStar (talk) 05:03, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Museums and libraries-related deletion discussions. North America1000 04:30, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Malaysia-related deletion discussions. North America1000 04:30, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. North America1000 04:31, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 02:39, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —MRD2014 Talk • Edits • Help! 02:35, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jdcomix (talk) 01:54, 24 August 2017 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Tradition_and_Custom_Museum&oldid=1078167775"