Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cactus Garden


 * 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   keep. I see enough support for a rename that I'll do that, but feel free to discuss/override the naming at the article talk page if that proves controversial. joe deckertalk to me 21:07, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Cactus Garden

 * – ( View AfD View log )

PROD for notability was removed and then a similar minor copyvio reinstated, concerns about notability raised and a citation challenged. Basically, the contributor seems to have justified the PROD s/he removed! AfD on the grounds of lack of non-trivial sources for notability. Sitush (talk) 20:14, 12 May 2011 (UTC)


 * edited to add !vote: weak keep It appears there is some confusion about what actually happened at this article but ... It looks like there may be a source in india today that supports a claim of "largest cactus garden in Asia" which would make me lean towards keeping, but the actual text is not visible in the snipped view   The remaining sources appear to be only trivial and so if we cannot verify the india today claim, I am OK with deletion. Active  Banana    (bananaphone  20:29, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
 * To clarify the confusion, I used Reflinks in automated mode (ie: via a "Favourites/Bookmark" link) immediately after PRODing. It fixed the (then single) reference but appears to have auto-deleted the PROD. It looks like a bug. I shall revert to using Reflinks manually, which provides the ability to preview changes. I have apologised to Active Banana for this casting of an aspersion. I had previously seen the same snippet in India Today but dismissed it as probably being a regurgitated piece of PR. I think we need more than just the one source for the statement, whether snippet view or otherwise. - Sitush (talk) 23:10, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I have registered my opinion as "week keep"- we have a Time of India source that clearly supports claim of "largest of its kind in Asia", although the other coverage appears to be fairly trivial. Active Banana    (bananaphone  18:19, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - This does seem to have significant coverage from national sources like The Times of India and The Indian Express  .--Oakshade (talk) 05:36, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I would question the description "significant coverage" The Times of India coverage is little more than a regurgitated press release. similarly the first Express india article being a puff piece about the opening of a local attraction. Active  Banana    (bananaphone  09:59, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
 * True. The article's not exactly a rock. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 10:23, 13 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep Passes WP:GNG, has good sources. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:15, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep The Chandigarh themed gardens are sufficiently unusual and extensive (in Indian or any context) to be notable; work to be done, of course Crusoe8181 (talk) 06:46, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I will note that the creator of the article left a keep !vote on the article talk page That opinion is now repeated by the creator on this page Active  Banana    (bananaphone  10:25, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note if this article survives the AfD it should be moved to its official name National Cactus and Succulent Botanical Garden and Research Centre Active  Banana    (bananaphone  10:29, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, a good spot. Using the correct title may have avoided the PROD in the first place. - Sitush (talk) 18:26, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep: The article's topic is notable, the garden is very popular in the region. http://www.google.co.in/search?hl=en&q=Cactus+Garden+panchkula&oq=Cactus+Garden+panchkula&aq=f&aqi=g1g-v2&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=2524l5562l0l12l12l1l4l4l0l390l1252l2-1.3 Mahesh Kumar Yadav (talk) 10:40, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Popularity is not a wikipedia criterion for notability, as far as I am aware. - Sitush (talk) 18:26, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Weeeell it is if verified by reliable sources. A Google search page does not fit the bill. Drmies (talk) 01:52, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, which is what Mahesh was told before he posted here - Sitush (talk) 01:56, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I saw that, Sitush--I came here via a thread at ANI. Have a look. Drmies (talk) 02:07, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep and if the title had been correct at the onset, we wouldn't be having this discussion. I don't want to appear bitey, but there have been a number of concerns raised about things like this from this user as of late.  PMDrive1061 (talk) 00:11, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 23:23, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Keep If a subject is cited in multiple references and is locally popular, it is of course notable. As a user above stated, google searches often do no justice. It seems that this place is a locally popular place, and hence I feel, we should have no further say on this as this page has to be kept, as this would necessitate a redefining of the term wide coverage.. Manorathan (talk) 07:44, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep A notable garden and a tourist spot. Article has been cleaned up now --Sodabottle (talk) 05:46, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment If kept, as seems to be the trend, it should be renamed, because there are numerous places around the world called Cactus Garden, including one in San Diego, one in Arizona, one at Stanford ... you get the idea. How about Cactus Garden (India)? Or its formal name as suggested above. If moved, it should NOT be left as a redirect because of all the other Cactus Gardens out there; maybe the redirect page could be converted to a DAB page. --MelanieN (talk) 01:09, 19 May 2011 (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.