Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Above & Beyond Children's 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 no consensus. W.marsh 14:49, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Above &amp; Beyond Children&

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Previously prodded, unclear notability. Prod removed Moglex 14:05, 6 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep the museum has been the subject of multiple articles in a reliable newspaper. The museum's effort to remain open despite financial problems has been controversial. Royal broil  15:02, 6 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete The article talks about floor space and financial problems but does not address notability in any meaningful way. It appears to be a worthy regional project that does not reach the level of notability. --Stormbay 18:34, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - It's the subject of independent secondary sources. The article putting too much emphasis on floor space and financial problems is a content issue, not a notability one. --Oakshade 16:51, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete museum with no claim of notabilty, travelwisconsin is a travel guide, and the other two sources are the local newspaper, which isn't really independent. If more sources are added outside the local area, will change vote. This is a Secret account 02:42, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * There's no such WP:LOCAL NEWSPAPER IS NOT INDEPENDENT guideline. If the Los Angeles Times was used as the source for the  Los Angeles Children's Museum would the Los Angeles Times suddenly become non-independent? --Oakshade 04:22, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 12:38, 8 November 2007 (UTC)


 * comment The struggle to stay afloat financially is gripping and predominates in the references. The references do not address notability and that is the crux of this discussion. --Stormbay 22:54, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * There would not have been stories about its financial problems unless those secondary sources considered it notable. Business struggle all the time, but not all of them are covered in the press.  --Oakshade 16:45, 9 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment If nothing else, it reveals the inadequacy of the article Children's museum. Mandsford 01:53, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. The article is very weak.  However most museums are notable.  Deleting based on the fact that it is poorly written is going too far.  I'll try and add a bit. Vegaswikian 19:53, 12 November 2007 (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.