Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Commercial playgrounds


 * 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 redirect to Playground. Liz Read! Talk! 06:07, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Commercial playgrounds

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

The content in this article appears to be highly irrelevant (it mostly contains very specific corporate and regulatory details) and we have a much more comprehensive article on the topic at Playground. Redtree21 (talk) 11:51, 29 December 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:25, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Products-related deletion discussions. Redtree21 (talk) 11:56, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment. I don't understand why this is a valid AfD nomination, if a merge has already been proposed and is being discussed...? Cielquiparle (talk) 22:01, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Relisting comment: What is the status of the Merge discussion mentioned here? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:53, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete This is an industry term for 'literally anything except a park or school playground'. Playground covers it fine, this article is otherwise just industry copy.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 01:04, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Redirect to Playground as an ATD - User:Liz, the merge discussion has had minimal activity in the last three months, with 3 opposes and 1 support. Reading the two articles, I agree with the opposition to the merge: there's nothing of value currently in this article for playground. That said, commercial playgrounds clearly meets GNG; I found several reasonable academic sources. (ex: ) Thus, because it seems like a reasonable search term (as it is an industry term that has been used over the years by academics and the press), I favor keeping the term as a redirect. Any reliable sources related to commercial playgrounds can be productively added to Playground, with no prejudice against splitting the article if someone wants to write a more elaborate history on commercial playgrounds/playspaces in the future. Suriname0 (talk) 16:38, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the merge discussion update, Suriname0. Liz Read! Talk! 05:08, 15 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Redirect as appropriate. Bearian (talk) 20:47, 17 January 2023 (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.