Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wairere Boulders


 * 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. Many of the arguments for deletion focus on who created the article and/or the confusion with similar attractions in the same area, rather than whether or not the subject is notable, therefore the argument to keep, with multiple reliable sources cited, is given more weight. The article is clearly in need of further improvements, but that is not a reason to delete. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:02, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Wairere Boulders

 * – ( View AfD View log )

No apparent notability for this nature park, and a search throws up a lot of directory listings rather than significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. There is already an article for the Horeke basalts that are the basis for the park. Stephen 23:17, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. My search turns up multiple examples of coverage in reliable sources, suggesting this is a legitimately notable tourist attraction. For example "Northland boulders draw tourists" in TVNZ (2007); "Kaikohe plans tourism future" in Stuff.co.nz (2008); "Rocking round the north" in New Zealand Herald (2009); "Hokianga: Hidden secrets" in New Zealand Herald (2011), and multiple coverage in significant travel guides.. --Arxiloxos (talk) 23:49, 26 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep. I am actually the owner of Wairere Boulders and could give you hundreds of references. Here just a few that could convince you about the importance of our business to New Zealand. You can open 90% of tourism guides and will find a reference to us.  Lonely Planet, Rough Guides.... Bus Tour by Great Sights Paihia to Wairere Boulders .  An article written by Elizabeth Light was published in the prestigious magazine North and South . Wairere Boulders on TV NZ Country Calendar. Just google Wairere Boulders  Here the link to the TV NZ News 2007 "Northland boulders draw tourists" we saved the movie which was deleted from the TV NZ page TV ONE NEWS --Wairere (talk) 11:25, 28 February 2012 (UTC) — Wairere (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 13:44, 28 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. WP is not a travelogue or a tourism company directory. It is also a bit SPAMish. A mention at Horeke basalts is sufficient. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 21:14, 28 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Complete mess. This article and Horeke basalts are about very closely related things and there appear to be two WP:COI editors (possibly using socks or anon edits) to further their different business goals. I actually believe that these are probably notable but I'm going to have to !vote merge to Horeke basalts, because of the COI issues. If there are genuine WP:RS, let them accumulate there. Stuartyeates (talk) 19:44, 29 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep. Wairere Boulders is similar to a National Park, but on private property. Hence it should have a separate listing like a New_Zealand_national_park. Unfortunately they cannot be listed on the page with NZ National Parks. WP has listed many tourism businesses for instance Waimangu Volcanic Valley, Waitomo Caves, Kelly Tarlton's Underwater World, R. Tucker Thompson. Wairere Boulders is as important as these well established Tourism Operators but much younger.  They should not be vindicated. The Horeke basalts have a length of about 30 km and to merge the two sites will confuse issues. I will continue editing Wairere Boulders, so please will someone clean it up to a format acceptable by WP. I am no very familiar with the WP rules. --Not-clue-less (talk) 23:08, 29 February 2012 (UTC) — Not-clue-less (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Keep, the business does appear to have significant coverage in national sources, such as NZ Herald, the Dominion, TVNZ and North & South. It also has coverage in local sources, naturally. Most of this coverage has only just been added to the article.- gadfium 03:55, 1 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete, it appears that all the content written about this business is from the owner and is heavily biased. None of it has supporting references (other than other articles written by the owner). It seems to be a complete mess full of unreliable content. Also the original article Horeke Basalts already covers the area in question. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Christopher3895 (talk • contribs) 06:37, 1 March 2012 (UTC)  — Christopher3895 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Comment: I've withdrawn my vote, but stand by my comment that this is a complete mess. There are three apparently completely different websites, none of which list a business name, charity name or personal name on their contact pages (a, b and c). The New Zealand charities and New Zealand companies registers contain no obvious mention of these activities by obvious names (including the personal names mentioned by some of the actors here). Stuartyeates (talk) 08:25, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I understand your confusion. Wairere Adventure Park appears to be a separate business located on the same road as Wairere Boulders, offering a range of tourist services but not focussing primarily on the basalts. The .com site offers information about the basalts but doesn't seem to be selling anything; however there seems to be a rivalry with the Wairere Boulders company. The .co.nz site belongs to the company we're discussing here.- gadfium 09:06, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Bingo! There is an active trademark application with a date of 31 Jan 2012. Maybe what we're seeing is an attempt to astroturf to support the applicants claim against their rival(s)? Stuartyeates (talk) 09:27, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

--Wairere (talk) 02:27, 2 March 2012 (UTC) 
 * Clarification! Wairere Bouldersexists for over 10 years already and has put up many road signs and did a lot of PR. Wairere Adventure Park just started 2 years ago. They try to officially register our business name to use our business name Wairere Boulders for their own business. The wairereboulders.com site Area of Wairere Boulders sends customers to their newly established business.
 * All articles on the Wairere Boulders page can be verified if needed, some of them are transcripts done with the permission of the papers.
 * Our personal names are on the bottom of the Brochure
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Relisting comment: Relisting debate to generate more clear consensus. Even discounting the single purpose account "keep" !votes, I still feel there is no consensus to delete the article.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, B  music  ian  03:45, 4 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep per gadfium. The article's a mess at present, and needs a lot of clean-up, but this is a notable topic so should be kept. It also seems sufficiently distinct from the encompassing Horeke basalts to cover separately. --Avenue (talk) 10:19, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete/Merge As a company this lacks notability and the article appears self-promotinal. As a subject it is covered under Horeke basalts and any relevant material should be merged there. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 02:13, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete I still stand by my comment that all the content seems to be biased and written as an advertisment by the owner. Also the name of this business seems to be in contention from the apparent fight over trademarks. All of the relevant content is already covered in the Horeke basalts page. Christopher3895 (talk) 23:00, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep What seems to be or what appears to be is irrelevant. Only what is matters.  All newspaper articles mentioned or TV-news-clips and TV-shows can be verified as we already stated. Also,Wairere Boulders is a registered company. --Wairere (talk) 02:07, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * What counts in wikipedia is not truth, but what can be referenced to reliable sources. Stuartyeates (talk)
 * But in fairness to Wairere, there are plenty of reliable sources that discuss the tourist attraction and use the name "Wairere Boulders". See above.--Arxiloxos (talk) 03:02, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah yes it is now a registered company, as of today (8th March). They don't own the trademark though so a company name is a bit meaningless if someone else owns the trademark. Christopher3895 (talk) 03:28, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I believe that this entry was not present when this discussion started, in this edit I specifically mention checking this database. So do we have two separate WP:SPAs each with a WP:COI and a current legal application in process in relation to the name? Stuartyeates (talk) 04:34, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * There is now a date attached to the entry, 8 March supporting this contention. Stuartyeates (talk) 18:42, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Possible resolution If this entry is to be kept, it needs to be extensively rewritten. At the start of the discussion, Arxiloxos said Wairere was cited in reliable local and international publications. Also, Not-clue-less volunteered to rewrite the article, although they appear directly involved with Wairere. If Not-clue-less is acting in good faith then I suggest they bring the article up to standard.


 * User Wairere has a conflict of interest in this article and should realise that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a tourist guide as was eloquently put it. NealeFamily (talk) 06:56, 10 March 2012 (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.