Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/White River Valley Museum


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 11:09, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

White River Valley Museum

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable local museum. The only sources I was able to find are either directory-like or affiliated. No in-depth coverage. Happy Squirrel (talk) 02:12, 4 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment In doing my usual follow up to AfD, I noticed this is a stale userspace draft from 2010 recently moved into mainspace by user:Legacypac. I am perfectly open to returning it to its original location it that is judged to be better. Happy Squirrel (talk) 02:17, 4 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment yup I found it. No way it would get deleted at MfD as it looks like a pretty good page. Now that it's at AfD I'll let others weigh in but I'm very Opposed to it going back to a Userspace if the topic is deemed not notable. What value would there be in that? Legacypac (talk) 02:47, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Procedural close - The move has been reverted per WP:BRD as Happysquirrel expresses reasonable concerns that it isn't suitable for the mainspace as is required for such a move. — Godsy (TALK CONT ) 03:48, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment: moved the draft to main space, which is allowed per WP:STALE.  brought it here starting a consensus driven discussion, and that's fine as well. Moving an article during AfD is not prohibited, cf. WP:AFDEQ, but is better left for post-AfD, and when it happens during AfD most often entails moving it to a perceived better title. Moving this article back to userspace, citing BRD, and then calling for a procedural close is a misunderstanding. Sam Sailor Talk! 13:49, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Misunderstanding is the kindest possible word for Godsy's continued efforts to screw up my efforts to daylight articles with potential. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Legacypac/Godsymoves Legacypac (talk) 14:35, 4 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep What the heck - you can't move a page and close an AfD like that just at the beginning. One editor's opinion on suitability for mainspace does not equal a decision. Stop stalking my edits and reversing my moves on your pointless crusade to put good topics back in stale userspace. This museum is as notable as MANY other establishments with Wikipedia pages and it is a heavily referenced well written article.  Legacypac (talk) 04:58, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep in some form. I am not clear about the procedural disagreements, and the reference to copyright in the article edit history, but the museum itself is pretty obviously notable, with its activities covered in both local and statewide media such as  and many more. --Arxiloxos (talk) 14:49, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep as has reliable sources to pass WP:GNG, and should be put back into mainspace as a notable museum topic. Atlantic306 (talk) 15:17, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Museums and libraries-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 15:44, 4 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep, passes WP:GNG thanks to the sources found by . Sam Sailor Talk! 12:36, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep This article subject passes WP:GNG due to the multiple sources which provide significant coverage. Also above Arxiloxos lists above more references that also denote notability. Fouetté rond de jambe en tournant (talk) 03:12, 12 May 2016 (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.