Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Liberty Mountain Resort


 * 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The result was SPEEDY KEEP, withdrawn by nominator (nominator struck his delete vote and voted to keep) Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  13:34, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Liberty Mountain Resort

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

non notable business C5mjohn 02:05, 10 May 2007 (UTC)


 * keep there are a number of other ski resorts in wikipedia.  See Category:Ski areas and resorts in Pennsylvania  &mdash; Gaff  ταλκ 02:23, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep on the basis of the further arguments presented. DGG 00:41, 11 May 2007 (UTC) Delete as discussed yesterday for 2 of the other ones. .  'DGG' 03:46, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
 * delete there are a number of other ski resorts in wikipedia...and we should delete any of the non notable ones. Many times list of ski areas and resorts in the United States would suffice C5mjohn 04:18, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep seems many people find a lot of these ski resorts notable, so I will focus on culling only the very small, obscure and unpopular resorts. C5mjohn 18:52, 10 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep. Almost all ski areas meet the notability standard, since they are covered in multiple, reliable secondary sources, e.g. Ski and Skiing magazines, plus local and regional newspapers with large circulations.  It is simply a matter of someone doing the legwork needed to dig up these sources, which are not always sitting online.  There is no need to serially list one ski area after another at AfD.  Our efforts would be better spent locating the sources and improving the articles than having AfD debates about them.  --Seattle Skier (talk) 08:49, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep A regionally well-known ski resort that receives thousands of visitors each winter should be notable. In my opinion the size of a major ski resort's operation sets it apart from a restaurant or a small business; it's more akin to a theme park. Propaniac 14:38, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Also, if we're going to have to discuss every single ski resort listed on Wikipedia, I do wish someone would have just bundled them together instead of everyone (including myself) duplicating their remarks from the two other discussions and presumably to any further such discussions. Propaniac 14:42, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Then the article should be sure to add proof that they recieve "thousands of visitors each winter" because some of the them might only get hundreds (because they might be very high class or just not popular) And I don't want to bundle all the ski resorts together because there are probably world renowned ones that ARE notable.


 * Strong keep - The nominator seems to be putting ski area up for deletion as a matter of course. This may be a small ski area (compared to other areas such as Vail Ski Resort and Killington Ski Resort), but it is not a small business.  More sourcing is needed, but as for usage:  This place is open 70 - 100 days a years and for most of that it is getting hundreds of visitors a day.  As for WP:CORP, I have seem numerous articles on this area in the Washington Post and local magazines such as the Washingtonian. --EMS | Talk 18:05, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep a notable and well-known ski resort. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  18:14, 10 May 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.