Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aqualandia

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) Iffy★Chat -- 15:09, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Aqualandia

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

No sources, let alone being a non-notable waterpark Lewwitness (talk) 22:10, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Spain-related deletion discussions. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 01:01, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. 3600 reviews on tripadvisor. Szzuk (talk) 12:47, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:55, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tripadvisor reviews are completely meaningless here and can't be used to establish notability. That said, I did find Holidaymaker 'nearly dies' on 33m high water slide in Benidorm and COMUNICADO: Aqualandia presenta Cyclón, su gran novedad para 2018, which would seem to be enough to establish notability by themselves, so I would opt to Keep. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 23:30, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It is a tourist attraction, and as such there will be coverage in newspapers, travel guides, etc. We need to have a wp:Tourist attraction (currently a redlink) guideline or essay or whatever, to cover this subject towards reducing the number of useless AFDs about them. --Doncram (talk) 04:50, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. But needs improvements to add references. Expertwikiguy (talk) 21:16, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Trip advisor reviews are effectively meaningless for the purposes of Wikipedia, however, I do concur that the sources brought forward by Dennis Brown seem to indicate notability, and I also concur with Doncram's assessment. --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 14:48, 9 April 2018 (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.