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.
I found no significant coverage. A claim to notability is that it is historic, but I can find no proof of that.
SL93 (
talk) 00:46, 14 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Keep. I believe the article as written, that it is a public attraction which includes a railway museum and more. And I tend to believe it is historic too, probably a railway museum would be located in a historic train station. See the very excellent essay
wp:ITSAPUBLICATTRACTION and
wp:ITSAMUSEUM. This appears to be notable and we keep these. --
Doncram (
talk) 00:06, 15 July 2019 (UTC)reply
But sure, it could/should be tagged about inline sources being needed. But neither the nominator nor I have done a proper search using Spanish language and other local languages, using proper names for the place. The nominator is just not happy with the state of current sourcing; they essentially
wp:IDONTLIKEIT without really questioning its existence and its notability. Or they want to force cleanup right now, but
wp:AFDISNOTFORCLEANUP. --
Doncram (
talk) 00:06, 15 July 2019 (UTC)reply
So you admitted you found no notability either for this article that has been sitting unsourced since 2005. Get over yourself and assuming stuff.
SL93 (
talk) 00:14, 15 July 2019 (UTC)reply
No, I did not say I searched and found nothing; I did not even try to do a proper search. But sure there are lots of hits immediately on La Estacion Aguascalientes, including about a restaurant and a whole barrio. I don't read Spanish easily and I am not trying to sort out about the historic train station for which everything is named, and about the museum which may no longer exist. But once notable always notable.
About your suggestion to "fuck essays", well I think wp:CIVILITY is more fundamental, and with language like that you are offending me and probably others. Anyhow
wp:ITSAPUBLICATTRACTION essay in particular is written as a shorthand way to respond to idiotic, uninformed AFDs. Not saying this AFD is one, or that you personally are idiotic and uninformed, so don't go attacking me about
wp:PERSONALATTACKS either. Essays are helpful in communicating within AFDs and elsewhere, even ones I don't personally agree with, because they can communicate much more what someone's position is. Instead of writing out the same stuff again and again in response to idiotic, ill-informed AFDs AFDs which are cumulatively repetitive. --
Doncram (
talk) 00:31, 15 July 2019 (UTC) 00:40, 15 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Oh please. You were certainly not being civil even without using such words and offended me. So how about I break it down for you - "The nominator is just not happy with the state of current sourcing" - There is no sourcing. "they essentially
wp:IDONTLIKEIT without really questioning its existence and its notability." - I actually did question its notability. So, fuck essays, especially ones that you claim are "very excellent" and that you started.
SL93 (
talk) 00:35, 15 July 2019 (UTC)4reply
"There is no sourcing"??? I simply don't believe you. Sure, there is no sourcing currently included in the article, but that is not at all a valid reason to delete an article. Given that you and I both probably believe that there was a historic train station in "La Estacion" neighborhood, and that there is or was a theme park including a railway museum, I am 100% certain that sourcing about it exists, maybe off-line, maybe in Spanish, but it has certainly been written about. So there is good reasoning to believe that sourcing exists, so this should be closed "Keep" as it is, or even "Speedy keep" because there is no valid deletion argument.
Yep, I am proud to have mostly created that essay, and another one or two, that have survived MFD attempts to delete them. You double-down with your language, which really does actually offend me. --
Doncram (
talk) 00:42, 15 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Why should I when you came in with false accusations blazing?
SL93 (
talk) 00:43, 15 July 2019 (UTC)reply
I would have been perfectly fine with your Keep vote if you didn't try to turn it into me having a vendetta.
SL93 (
talk) 00:51, 15 July 2019 (UTC)reply
"So there is good reasoning to believe that sourcing exists, so this should be closed "Keep" as it is, or even "Speedy keep" because there is no valid deletion argument." - I have been in many AfDs in the past 10 years. That is so not how AfD works.
SL93 (
talk) 00:53, 15 July 2019 (UTC)reply
AFDs are about determining if topics are notable, i.e. whether sourcing exists somewhere, not about the current state of an article.
Why should you not use profanity? Well, because you are offending me by that profanity. Why should you not use profanity repeatedly, when you have been informed that it is offending someone? Well to avoid appearing to be a jerk. And you should care about CIVILITY and community and all that. This AFD process is a community process, and in a small way you are abusing that process and offending editors (or at least me) and contributing to the decline of Wikipedia. So, no offense, I am tending towards concluding "what a jerk" and walking away, though I will try to be open-minded that you might possibly have a point about something or another. However currently I do believe that there is no validity to this AFD nomination, so it is tending to drag down my impression of you. This is getting too personal, in both directions, so I will probably respond less or not at all from now on. Enjoy your vitriole. --
Doncram (
talk) 00:58, 15 July 2019 (UTC)reply
That is funny because that is what I concluded when you turned it into me having a vendetta against the article (which is also uncivil, also with no apology). If it helps, I doubt that the article is even 100% truthful or truthful at all with no sources since 2005.
SL93 (
talk) 01:01, 15 July 2019 (UTC)reply
If the notability guideline isn't enough to explain my position, is the policy
WP:V enough?
SL93 (
talk) 01:05, 15 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Comment I am also struggling to find sources that show notability. The
Old Railway Station Museum already has a Wikipedia article. There is also
this article in The Architect's Newspaper which certainly would be the basis of an interesting and notable article. However, I can't be sure if the Museo Espacio is actually the subject of the
La Estacion Theme Park article, or if they are separate developments in Aguascalientes.
Railfan23 (
talk) 00:59, 15 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Some further research finds a lot of
reliable sources for the existence and notability of Museo Espacio in Aguascalientes. My guess (for whatever it's worth) is that the
La Estacion Theme Park may have been the first attempt at creating what is now called the Museo Espacio. So my recommendation is that we delete the La Estacion Theme Park article and create a new
Museo Espacio article from sources.
Railfan23 (
talk) 01:08, 15 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Sorry. that is a ridiculous suggestion. The facts you suggest are motivation for a rename/move/update, not for deletion. And please consider
wp:ATD, that we are obligated to look for alternatives to deletion. Not to violate Wikipedia policy about contributions and delete stuff, only to recreate it later without credit to original contributors. --
Doncram (
talk) 01:43, 15 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Wow, what have I done to deserve that sort of hostility? I made an honest suggestion. Whoever decides to close this "Article for discussion" (emphasis added) can decide whether the suggestion is a good one or not. The article as it stands is
unverifiable and in its current state is not
notable. Given that, I believe it should be deleted and not renamed/moved, unless
reliable sources can be found to show that Museo Espacio is indeed the same thing as La Estacion Theme Park. I was quite deliberate in not suggesting that we redirect or move the article because the connection between the two is my
original research so is not a valid basis for making a decision. I just thought it was interesting that there might be a connection.
Railfan23 (
talk) 01:54, 15 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Okay, yes,
Railfan23, I am sorry I was bitey towards you; for some reason I was in a pretty crabby mood. Separate from this AFD, I have been cumulatively irritated by other AFDs that advocated for deletion of a thing invoking
wp:TNT, only for the thing to be recreated because it is obviously notable, and in the process violating Wikipedia's Gnu Public License or whatever is our current license with contributors (more about this in essay
wp:TNTTNT which I started). Here, you didn't argue "TNT" specifically but it seemed superficially similar. Please accept my apology for putting your reasonable comment in the same box as some previous TNT-arguers and for my blasting out in your direction, inappropriately. Thank you for contributing here, instead (and thank you likewise to
Uncle G also). Your point that you were not sure of the relationship between the two things is quite reasonable, too. And in fact it looks to me now like Museo Espacio is a different thing, and that La Estacion Theme Park ought to be moved/renamed to Complejo Tres Centurias instead. --
Doncram (
talk) 16:14, 16 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Comment: Since I maybe didn't make myself clear in my nomination somehow, my issues are
WP:N and
WP:V, a guideline and a policy.
SL93 (
talk) 01:14, 15 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Merging or keeping would be fine if we could verify the article.
SL93 (
talk) 00:04, 16 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Comment. The
Old Railway Station Museum article has a title sounding like it must be in Cleveland or some other place in the U.S. It was created in ancient times, 12 October 2005, by i.p. editor 12.144.179.218 at a name which is apparently a translation, but that was a poor decision and/or should be revisited. Like we have
Museo del Prado not "Prado Museum". IMO it should be moved/renamed to some name reflecting better its actual name and/or usage in guidebooks and other sources, perhaps "Museo Ferrocarrilero de Aguascalientes" or some name reflecting "Estacion", depending. It is not even wikilinked from its mention in
List_of_museums_in_Mexico#Aguascalientes because no one would expect that the Wikipedia article name would be so different. It was
only just now wikilinked from La Estacion Theme Park article by Railfan.
The "La Estacion Theme Park" article was created also on 12 October 2005 also by editor 12.144.179.218, who judged it was a different thing than the museum. It seems to me to correspond to the Spanish wikipedia article
es:Complejo Tres Centurias, which is about a complex, "un parque temático ubicado en el Barrio de la Estación de la Ciudad de Aguascalientes", and it includes the plaza, "La Plaza de las Tres Centurias". Maybe in fact there was in 2005 promotion of an official "La Estacion Theme Park" name for the complex including the plaza, or maybe that was the i.p. editor's attempt to compose an English translation of what they thought the name should be, while locally it was then and/or now more known as "Complejo Tres Centurias". IMO the plaza itself could possibly merit an article, but would be better covered in a larger article about the complex. It would probably be good now for the "La Estacion Theme Park" article to be moved/renamed to "Complejo Tres Centurias" or "Tres Centurias Complex" or the like. The proper AFD outcome for that would be "Keep", with recommendation that it also be moved/renamed or with recommendation that a wp:RM be opened to consider that move. ("Move/rename" alone is not a proper AFD outcome; it is not an option tracked in
wp:AFDSTATS; "Keep" properly describes the action of keeping the content, and moving/renaming is an editing decision like other editing to be decided at Talk page of the article.) --
Doncram (
talk) 16:14, 16 July 2019 (UTC)reply
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.