Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Public Library of Pichilemu


 * 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   merge to Pichilemu. Consensus is that the library is not notable enough for its own article. After reading the discussion on Bigger digger's talk page, I think the original target of Pichilemu has more support than Agustín Ross Cultural Centre. Feel free to disagree and discuss the target amongst yourselves further. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 05:34, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Public Library of Pichilemu

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

I tried looking through Google (perhaps some will have better luck than me) but I couldn't find any independent coverage of this library in reliable third party sources. It doesn't seem any more notable than, say, Public Library of Oklahoma City or Public Library of Orleans. :| TelCo NaSp  Ve :|  04:44, 18 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep This is bordering on disruption, TeleCom. See also WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Pichilemu topics have as much right as largest cities such the ones you mentioned to have an article on Wikipedia. You just don't seem to have cared about looking for references. At a first glance, I found a University of Chile article: : Quote: "la Biblioteca Pública de Pichilemu, sino también a las instalaciones ofrecidas por el Centro Cultural Agustín Ross." The document talks specifically about the organization. from Gaceta Regional. "El Centro Cultural Agustín Ross cuenta con una biblioteca pública," It is mentioned on a book named Mensaje Presidencial, apparently containing the message when it was first inaugurated on Santa María street. Anyway, I hope you do a research next time, and not just bounce and saying Pichilemu can't have articles because it's not as largest as Oklahoma. It's an idiocy, Chile has not the population of United States, so cities have to be smaller. --Diego Grez (talk) 14:42, 18 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm not talking about the town Pichilemu; I'm talking about articles about every little detail of it. That's giving UNDUE weight. We can have a general overview of the town in the article Pichilemu; we just don't need several articles branching off the town to cover every little place and detail that might or might not exist within it. And accusations of disruption are pretty serious; what do you mean by "bordering on disruption" anyway? The last AfD that I remember I had was here. :| TelCo  NaSp  Ve :|  15:48, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * What don't you understand? If I have created articles for these organizations in Pichilemu is because they are notable enough to be in this encyclopedia. I was not talking about the city itself, but articles on the topic have reliable references, and have the chance to be expanded and well-referenced as notable organizations, just like an article about the Public Library of Oklahoma would exist. Why this can't live here? --Diego Grez (talk) 18:50, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Why this can't be here? Because it is not notable.— Chris! c / t 19:15, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Please don't take it personally, Diego Grez. I'd rather that you work on the Pichilemu article than on this branch article. Heck, you could even have it merged into the main one. :| TelCo  NaSp  Ve :|  04:47, 19 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Museums and libraries-related deletion discussions.  — :| TelCo  NaSp  Ve :|  16:19, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Keep/Merge This might be better done as a section in our article on Pichilemu but this will not require deletion. Colonel Warden (talk) 08:04, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Chile-related deletion discussions.  — :| TelCo  NaSp  Ve :|  16:19, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete or merge the creator claims that the topic has reliable references, but I don't see any. But the problem is that such local organization is not notable. I think it makes more sense to have an overview in the city article.— Chris! c / t 19:12, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh my God. Are you fucking blind or what. There is a University of Chile document, local newspapers documents and it is mentioned on other government documents. What else do you want? Want a mention by the Archduke of Austria? This is my final edit on Wikipedia, and I hope you do understand this, Capiche? --Diego Grez (talk) 19:20, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * No, I am not fucking blind. Thanks for asking. Anyway, none of those links look reliable to me. The University of Chile one may work. But having 1 source =/= notable. If there is no significant secondary sources coverage, then it is not notable.— Chris! c / t 19:51, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Merge and delete is never a valid afd outcome. riffic (talk) 06:31, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Strong keep per Diego. I agree with Diego. City libraries are notable and Chile is no exception. Try googling in Spanish maybe? This does need expansion though, if it can't be expanded further then I agree with Colonel merge into main article into a "Notable landmarks" section. Please avoid personal attacks though Diego, Chris is entitled to his opinion.. Dr.  Blofeld  10:19, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * As to the PA, yes and I don't mind saying to any non-native speaker of English, however fluent they may be, the word fuck has many meanings and its popularity in American cinema can be misleading: If the use of this word is botched, which it often is by non-native speakers, the outcome of meaning and misunderstanding is dreadful: Anytime it's put wrong as to context or syntax, never mind what the speaker meant, it's likely to be taken more or less as "I want you dead." The easiest way to skirt these worries is not to use the word at all outside the bounds of friendship or entertainment. Gwen Gale (talk) 11:12, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I googled in Spanish and it turned up the same results, thank you very much. You assert that city libraries are notable; I have to ask, how are they notable? We don't have an article for every single city library that exists on the planet; it must follow a certain set of notability requirements, which you have not addressed. And why are we bickering over the definition of the word "fuck" anyway? :| TelCo  NaSp  Ve :|  19:51, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Solvay Public Library has an article, national registered place or not. Pichilemu is twice the size of Solvay. New York.  Dr.  Blofeld  17:47, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Neutral comment While I don't think it's much of a worry if an article about any library open to the public stays on en.WP, I don't see how a small library in a town of 12,000 people would meet WP:N unless there was something notable, through wider independent coverage, about its architecture, history or collections. Why not put this content in Pichilemu? Given the size of the town and lack of notability, readers are much more likely to see it there than in this article. Gwen Gale (talk) 11:01, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * If Solvay Public Library is not a national registered place, then I will support deletion. But being national registered place is notable. So, Solvay Public Library should have an article. This can't be argued for the Public Library of Pichilemu.— Chris! c / t 19:34, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * See? Exactly that is bias. "being [U.S] national registered place is notable". Cool. Diego Grez (talk) 19:56, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * No, that's not what Chris means. Regardless of US, registered buildings are like listed buildings in the UK. They have some historical or architectural signifiance to the national heritahe which makes them notable. I'm sure Chile has a similar national listing of historic buildings. If they do then I'm sure there would be agreement that they are notable. But town libraries regardless of historical registers are notable buildings in my view. That doesn't hide the fact that this article does need expansion and more sources but I as Gwen said think there are far worse encyclopedia topics to be worrying about. This could easily be merged unless there is an abundance of material to write about it. Dr.  Blofeld  20:03, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I am not even going to address Diego's comment. He apparently thinks that calling me fucking blind and accusing me biased is going to help strengthen his argument.— Chris! c / t 20:24, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * No, for a reason the library is hosted on a National Monument of Chile (Agustín Ross Cultural Centre) --Diego Grez (talk) 20:47, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Size does not matter. What matters is the notability of an article and how much due weight it should be given. :| TelCo  NaSp  Ve :|  19:51, 20 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Strong keep: Per Diego. --  S ulmues (talk) 18:11, 19 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Merge & redirect to Agustín Ross Cultural Centre which, according to the library article, is where the library is currently based. Per WP:LOCAL I'm not convinced all libraries are notable and I'm not convinced this one passes WP:GNG. With apologies to Diego. Bigger digger (talk) 23:20, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Exactly. WP:LOCAL is an excellent standard of measurement for these articles. :| TelCo  NaSp  Ve :|  19:51, 20 September 2010 (UTC)


 * merge with article on the cultural centre, which is something that has sourcing. riffic (talk) 05:29, 20 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I guess I'm going to have to pile on and say merge with Pichilemu, since I explicitly stated that option above. :| TelCo  NaSp  Ve :|  19:51, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Would you consider changing your merge target to Agustín Ross Cultural Centre? I will host the conversation at User talk:Bigger digger. Ta, Bigger digger (talk) 21:10, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete City libraries can certainly be notable, if there is enough information to write an article that is more than a directory listing. At present, there does not seem to be any. This isn't unexpected, since by usual standards this is an extremely small city, population about 13,000. I can think of no town of this size anywhere which is likely to have notable libraries--unless the building happens to be notable historically--in which case it's basically the building not the institution that is notable.   In the US, we usually merge articles like these for any municipal institution that is a mere listing.     DGG ( talk ) 04:02, 24 September 2010 (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.