Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Child 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 keep. (Non-admin closure)  Little Mountain  5   22:39, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Child Museum

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)
 * Note -page moved to Child Museum of Cairo to accomodate others.

Unasserted notability. &mdash;  La Pianista  (T•C) 03:33, 18 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete due to lack of content. The article contains only a few words, so it might even fall under CSD A1. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  03:37, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Changed to strong keep with the recent edits. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  15:25, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Dear dear Julian you should know better than this. Wiki is here to be expanded! A quick google check would have shown up a number of sources to assert its notability. When is this running to AFD before even asking the creator to try to at least expand it going to stop? Would somebody please kindly ask the creator to expand itin future before running to AFD please, its such a waste of time. I don't start articles on unencyclopedic or non notable subjects, people here should know this. Uliger another I created was also considered "non notable". I can't be expected to do all the work here, but I start them off as stubs in good faith that somebody will come along and expand it. Actually I'm not so bothered now as it prompted me to start another ten articles on museums, including Oman Children's Museum see Template:Museums in Oman!! Dr. Blofeld       White cat 10:22, 18 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete - possibly per CSD A1, like JC stated, but more because of WP:N.-- TRU    CO   04:11, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. I have added a couple of sources to the article, and the museum seems to be notable enough to warrant inclusion. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 05:03, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per Metro's edits and the fact that ghits show evidence that there is material available which can be added to show notability. No ghits don't confer notability but in this case the presence of info which establishes notability shows room for improvement of the article. StarM  06:40, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Museums and libraries-related deletion discussions.   — StarM  06:42, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Egypt-related deletion discussions.   — StarM  06:42, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep. Thanks to Metropolitan90 for identifying it for us; the question must be, is this museum notable?  Are there any distinguishing features that would set it apart from all the other museums in the world?  If a consensus develops that the museum is not notable, it could be transwikied to Wikitravel.  Baileypalblue (talk) 07:08, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment I don't think it has to be set apart from any other (children's) museum. It's my personal opinion, though I think it also meets WP:ORG, that museums generally generate significant attention/coverage to meet the notability threshold. Here we're also dealing with a museum in a non English speaking country, which presents further challenges StarM  07:13, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, I've been to some non-notable museums in my time, including a heavily promoted maritime museum that turned out to be a trailer with a 20 foot beach out back, so I wouldn't identify museums as generally notable; but if this is the nationally prominent museum it appears to be I'd say it makes the cut. Baileypalblue (talk) 07:49, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
 * We can't transwiki articles from Wikipedia to Wikitravel; it's not licensed under the GFDL. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 09:37, 18 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep -obviously now asserts notability and is a worthy article.  Dr. Blofeld       White cat 11:02, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep notability clear. Including connection to Egyptian "first lady." Collect (talk) 15:14, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Perfectly sensible disambiguation page. Comment why is there no AfD notice on the disambig page? Mjroots (talk) 17:36, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The page this AfD is about was moved here.  Little Mountain  5   22:14, 18 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep especially with new edits and sources Frank Anchor Talk 18:30, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep new version clearly asserts notability. SMSpivey (talk) 20:51, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep a reasonable disambig page but is that the same page as other editors are commenting on - is this a malformed AfD. MilborneOne (talk) 22:24, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The page this AfD is about was moved here.  Little Mountain  5   22:34, 18 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep with the recent expansion. Good job, Blofeld! — Ed   17  (Talk /  Contribs)  22:31, 18 January 2009 (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.