Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Angel Fire 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 was keep. (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 01:04, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Angel Fire Resort

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable and no notability asserted. Refs are few and all promotional. No independednt refs. Reads like an advertisement. Velella ^{Velella Talk} 20:33, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Mexico-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:16, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:16, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I found a few sources, but it wasn't easy: New York Times, New York TImes, Dallas News. Most of the other hits were too promotional or routine. Google News has some local coverage that might be useful for citations, but I don't think it really does much for notability. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:38, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per NinjaRobotPirate. The sources in there already show it meets the GNG. I added another, but could have added many more. There were 2300 hits on Newsbank, of which I think probably 95% are ski reports, but that still leaves what looks like at least a hundred high quality sources. Much remains to be added, e.g. the resort's water usage is a perennial issue for the town in dealing with its state water allotment and so on. For some reason it's a big deal in Texas, too. We should have a specific notability guideline for things that are a big deal in Texas.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 15:36, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. A prominent ski resort, as noted by the other comments, and you can also find a bunch of coverage on HighBeam [1]. --Arxiloxos (talk) 16:38, 10 February 2014 (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.