Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abdi İpekçi 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. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:35, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Abdi İpekçi Park

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is a park, just a park, and one with no claim to notability. Fails WP:GNG. This article was created by blocked sock User:TheWindInTheTrees. The article was apparently saved from WP:G5 deletion by the contribution by User:CeeGee. However, this contribution was only sourced to Yelp which is not a reliable source. Both paragraphs have copyvio issues. Coupling this, and the lack of notability with WP:DENY makes a strong delete case. Just Chilling (talk) 23:44, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 07:27, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 07:27, 23 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment, Abdi İpekçi Peace Monument is also up for deletion.Coolabahapple (talk) 07:40, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * . 86.17.222.157 (talk) 19:34, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete No claim of notability. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 02:23, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Just an ordinary park. The references don't do anything to show notability. The king of the sun (talk) 15:43, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete I've looked through some references to it, but it's almost universally about things that have happened in the park, rather than the park itself being notable for some reason. Passing references don't make for a good basis for an article here. A park can't gain notability via inheritance (see WP:NGEO. The existing references on the article are to a dead website now available only through archive.org (and the original isn't much of a source anyway) and a Yelp review, which also isn't a reliable source. Nothing sustaining notability here in any respect. Sure, it exists, but nothing here suggests even an inkling of passing WP:NGEO. --Hammersoft (talk) 18:40, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep We have articles on parks like this for most major cities in North America and Northern Europe, goegraphical locations are usually notable.♦ Dr. Blofeld  19:28, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep A search on Google Books  gets plenty of hits, some describing the physical park in some depth and some talking about what people do or have done there, or plan to do to it. Notability is nothing to do with the present state of the article or whether the park is unusual in some way. It is purely about on whether the park has been noted, and that is certainly the case here. My Turkish is a bit weak, but selective cut-and-paste of snippets from the search results into Google Translate yields the following:
 * We read in the newspapers last week; Ankara Municipality decided to remove the Hittite Monument in Yenişehir and change the names of the Lausanne Field and the Abdi Ipekci Park. On this, journalists, the Prime Minister from the Presidential ...
 * 5 June 1979 Abdi Ipekci Park, founded on the World Environment Day, is spread over an area of ​​60 000 m2 and has a 5-acre pool, fountains, amphitheater, children's garden and flower gardens. ...
 * In Ankara Abdi Silk Park (Figure 22) and in the pools of the Sivas Government Square, the traditional fountain fountain form is used only as a decorative motif in some modern water architectural examples. Susuyanlar water ...
 * Even if these lands were not in the hands of the municipality, they could not see the project, the people concerned, the superiors, the Abdi Silkist Park project. By making a generalization, for whatever reason, the protection of the soil that is in the hands of the Ankara Municipality ...
 * With the transfer of the present place of the present, a green belt will be formed which is connected with the Abdi Ipekci Park and connected to the Kurtuluş Park. As a green field measure against Ankara air pollution, if the city is surrounded by a green belt, the air caused by the heat difference between the city and the city, ...
 * The Headscarf Memorandum Anneleri Platform continues to expand the Protest of the Headscarf Legislative Clothes held in Ankara every Saturday at the Hacibayram Mosque and every Pa: zar Abdi Ipekci Park. ...
 * On March 1, 1990, Saturday, the police radios in Ankara Abdi Silk Park were receiving more or less exciting speeches. Because Hacettepe Salim in the park could not perform his art with his unique taste. The name "Performance" ...
 * 650 people stayed in the Abdi Silk Park for four nights. At the end of four days, the wait was decided to maintain groups of 100 people alternately. When Sener's 10 days are over, the earthquake victims are now with a group of 500 people ...
 * A committee was set up in the municipality with contributions: "Volunteer Committee of Friends of Animals" The committee made its first performance in Abdi Ipekci Park on Saturday. The call of the committee is the result of the captains of the capital parked with cats and dogs ...
 * Looking up from above, a ridiculous, meaningless crowd moves towards Abdi Ipekci Park. You're in that crowd. You had a protest telegraph from the Red Crescent Post. Students from other universities come together and press ...
 * It certainly seems to be an interesting place. Aymatth2 (talk) 01:36, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
 * These certainly attest to the park existing, but from what I can tell none of them attest to the park being notable. These are passing mentions in text that otherwise isn't focused on the park. Sure, things happen in the park. That doesn't make it notable either, as WP:NGEO notes "Geographical features must be notable on their own merits. They cannot inherit the notability of organizations, people, or events." Has the park won an award of some kind? Apparently not. Is it the subject of significant coverage in multiple sources (WP:GNG #1), and not just trivial mentions as demonstrated above? Apparently not. Is it on some form of a national historic register? Apparently not. I'd be quite happy to shift my delete recommendation. However, though I thank you for finding these mentions, none of them rise to any sort of level that attests to the park itself being notable. --Hammersoft (talk) 15:37, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
 * These are just the 2-line snippets that Google displays in the list of search results. Several of these sources presumably go on to say a good deal more about the park, enough to establish general notability. For example, if you click on the second search result you get three snippets out of 9 pages that mention the park. Again, I don't speak Turkish, but the three that are shown seem to be discussing a plan to build a municipal palace in the park, describing the park, and describing how the park makes the city more livable. That is, they give in-depth coverage. This is no surprise. Any park in the downtown of a major city is likely to be well-discussed, e.g. Washington Square Park. Aymatth2 (talk) 19:25, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, Washington Square Park is iconic as the references on that article can attest to. I don't think that we can use that park as a wide paint brush to presume that all city parks are notable. I could just as well cite Chelsea Park in NYC, which is hardly iconic (and we don't have an article on that park, and don't even mention it on List of New York City parks). As to the Turkish links; I agree the park is mentioned. But "presumably" isn't enough to go on. Failing translation, we don't know how its mentioned. 9 mentions in a book spanning 255 pages doesn't seem more than trivial mention to me. Thoughts? --Hammersoft (talk) 20:02, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Three visible paragraphs devoted to the park count as in-depth. I assume there is much more in the hidden parts of the book and in the many other books in the search results. Check the street view of Abdi Ipekci Park. Washington Square Park is small and dull by comparison. Abdi Ipekci Park is newer, and I gather the decision to create it on valuable downtown land was the subject of much debate, as was selecting the design and artwork, clearing and construction. Then there were political debates about the name. And of course the sources discuss the use that has been made of it. Lots to write about, for someone who speaks Turkish. Let's try to avoid systemic bias. Aymatth2 (talk) 02:18, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
 * PS. Someone with far too much time on their hands just started an article on Chelsea Park in NYC (see above). It is far from iconic and seems very mundane compared to this one but, like this one, it has been noted. Aymatth2 (talk) 18:01, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep A municipal park connected with an eponymous notable figure, featuring sculpture art of historical and political nature, and assertions of being the location of notable political activity. It needs work and expansion, and per Aymatth2 is extensively recognized in cursory searches, but I don't see any reason to delete on notability grounds. At bare minimum it can be merged with Abdi İpekçi until more substantive work is done. LargelyRecyclable (talk) 18:38, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TonyBallioni (talk) 05:44, 29 October 2017 (UTC)


 * 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.