Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/River Rock Casino 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 of the debate was keep.  Sango  123   15:23, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

River Rock Casino Resort

 * Delete, this page is an advertisement for this casino. --דניאל - Dantheman531 06:44, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Big improvement. --דניאל - Dantheman531 23:06, 16 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep, I wrote this article and was definitely not intending to advertise for the casino. Can you please tell me why you feel it seems like an advertisement? -→ Buchanan-Hermit ™ / ?!  06:56, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Note: I fixed some of the wording... I still don't think it's an advertisement for the casino. If you can elaborate on why you feel that way, it'd be helpful... -→ Buchanan-Hermit ™ / ?!  07:05, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * This page seems like an advertisement because it contains only information promoting the casino. Perhaps if more information was provided such as crowd information, history of the casino, etc. it would seem less like an advertisement and more like an objective article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danielrocks123 (talk • contribs)
 * Well, the casino is fairly new (about 2 years or less) so history is really hard to dig up at this point. Also, what do you mean by "crowd information"? -→ Buchanan-Hermit ™ / ?!  07:10, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * For instance, how many people come each day? What parts of the casino are popular? Danielrocks123 07:16, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * While the number of visitors can probably be found somewhere, wouldn't the second part be original research? -→ Buchanan-Hermit ™ / ?!  07:17, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Not necessarily, although I will agree that this information might be difficult to find.

Danielrocks123 07:20, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, after some research, "difficult" is an understatement. The casino opened late 2005, so it's close to impossible at this point. -→ Buchanan-Hermit ™ / ?!  07:23, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Ok. Anyway, it seems like the consensus is that this is a notable topic, so good work.  I'd suggest adding to this article, but it doesn't seem like it's going to be deleted this time around. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danielrocks123 (talk • contribs)
 * Well, let's wait and see. As for any additions, I honestly don't think it's going to be that much more possible until the casino's one-year anniversary rolls around. -→ Buchanan-Hermit ™ / ?!  07:28, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Daily attendance and what parts are popular have never been included in casino articles that I have seen. What is generally allowed for a new casino is a list of activities that provides ideas on where to expand the article over time.  But at some point I stongly beleive that this section needs to be dropped when the rest of the article is in good shape.  Given that the current article is almost past a stub, not much needs to be done other then filling in the blanks, like in the infobox.  Vegaswikian 22:55, 16 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep, advertisement allegations aside, it's a notable topic. _dk 07:14, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, I'd say "largest casino in British Columbia" is a fair assertation of notability. BryanG(talk) 07:18, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Neutral on this one for now -- I live in Vancouver and the fact that I know about the casino could well reflect a geographical bias. Biggest casino in BC is a fair assertion of notability, but is it enough of one? (And does the fact that they found a body there a month ago add to its notability in any way?) TheProject 13:22, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I've added that, and tagged the article as a current event as the body (which was not at River Rock but may be related to a person last seen there) has yet to be identified. -→ Buchanan-Hermit ™ / ?!  17:28, 12 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep - the fact that the 2006 Gemini Awards will be presented there provides a strong notability case in itself -- Tawker 14:44, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep but clean the article up and make it sound like less of a PR statement. SmartGuy 15:01, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep per TawkerBot, er, Tawker. lol --Starionwolf 18:20, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete advertisement. Tychocat 11:03, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Not an advertisement. CalJW 05:18, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. I cleaned this up some more so it should be a shorter but more encylopedic article.  I dropped some of the rumorish stuff and movd things around and added the standard infobox.  Vegaswikian 22:55, 16 June 2006 (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.