Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ocean Park Aquarium


 * 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) Ben · Salvidrim!   &#9993;  12:12, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Ocean Park Aquarium

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Doesn't meet with WP:GNG. And I've some doubt in WP:NPLACE. Because there is said that Attractions and landmarks often survive AfD. Here often means almost time. But I don’t know whether the often applies to it. ||  Orbit Wharf   💬  06:20, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  ||   Orbit Wharf   💬  06:20, 12 October 2021 (UTC)


 * The references do not open for me to anything. Is there a problem with the way they were put in this article? I want to check them before making a judgement. --Bduke (talk) 06:44, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Sorry what can I do to fix the article?? Binturong32 (talk) 07:11, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I've fixed the links so if you click on them now they will redirect Binturong32 (talk) 07:17, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Sure, but the references are not independent of the topic. You need some that are. --Bduke (talk) 08:27, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Binturong32 (talk) 09:25, 12 October 2021 (UTC)Binturong32 Hi everyone I'll try find some more independent sources. I'm not affiliated with this place in any way and am a completely independent researcher; I highly implore anyone who can assist with helping to update the page to make acceptable would really appreciate a lot. Just want to say that this facility is a major tourism venture in the state and I cant emphasize stronger that it truly is a valid candidate for its own Wikipedia page.
 * Keep Four more references added, one from the main daily newspaper in Western Australia. Now satisfies WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. I will await the outcome of this discussion before reviewing the article through to the main space. Regards. Hughesdarren (talk) 10:37, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions. North America1000 15:01, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. North America1000 15:01, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organisms-related deletion discussions. North America1000 15:01, 12 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep. Any open-to-the-public aquarium with multiple exhibits including a big shark tank is effectively a museum and is going to be Wikipedia-notable: it is a public attraction, it is a museum, etc. See essay wp:ITSAPUBLICATTRACTION / wp:ITSAMUSEUM, to which i contributed.  Okay, the essay can be modified to explicitly mention public aquariums, and wp:ITSANAQUARIUM (currently a redlink) can be directed to there too. --Doncram (talk) 07:57, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. The Rough Guide to Australia of 2019 called it a "world class" facility here.  Along with the references now in the article, this clearly the bar for notability.--Lockley (talk) 17:05, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. -- Binturong32 (talk) 03:04, 17 October 2021 (UTC) Thankyou so much everyone involved in contributiong to greatly improving the page (especially Hughesdarren). As an example of searching wiki for other place's pages to see some examples of how further to improve the page I noticed that the 'Armadale Reptile Centre' page doesn't have any sources cited at all besides the website which I just wanted to point out seems a little bit unbalanced in my personal opinion as it is not nominated for deletion (not that I wish it to be just wanted to compare it with Ocean Park) and for full transparency I have contributed to that page also in terms of it's species list (which I realise I should now cite, apologies). Its just that I'm not sure why that page escapes a need for improvement tag/scheduled for deletion tag when Ocean Park still has one after major improvements?? -- Binturong32 (talk) 03:04, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
 * To Binturong32, it's fine to note that Armadale Reptile Centre is mostly unreferenced. FYI, pointing out some other articles are worse is a type of argument termed wp:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS.  When that label is stated it is usually meant derogatorily, to dismiss some good faith editor.  But for this Ocean Park Aquarium article and for that one, I think it is reasonable for (virtually) everyone to agree that the topics are going to be Wikipedia-notable, because we can assume at first and prove if we have to, that substantial coverage exists.  The reasoning of wp:ITSAPUBLICATTRACTION / wp:ITSAMUSEUM applies.  I agree with you that it would be great if any participants here would choose to go and beef up that article.  I also don't think anyone should rush to nominate it for deletion and try to force work on the rest of us.  That would be wp:POINTY, i.e. disruptive of Wikipedia in an unproductive, false way. Because the person would be nominating it while knowing it is a notable topic.  And wp:BEFORE and wp:AFDISNOTFORCLEANUP would apply.  Anyhow, thank you Binturong for developing this article and for participating here. --Doncram (talk) 21:17, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Binturong32(talk) Hi its been a week since marked for deletion. Doesn't it normally expire after that?Binturong32 (talk) 07:55, 19 October 2021 (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.