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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:43, 18 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Vichy Water Park

Vichy Water Park (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)

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

Likely fails WP:GNG, I'm seeing a lack of SIGCOV. -- Prodraxis ^talk _contribs (she/her) 00:36, 27 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Amusement parks-related deletion discussions. -- Prodraxis ^talk _contribs (she/her) 00:36, 27 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lithuania-related deletion discussions. Spiderone ^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:59, 27 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Keep, meets WP:GNG [1] & [2], article requires improvements and secondary references though. Respublik ( talk) 19:04, 27 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Keep. It is a notable public facility because it is the largest water park in Lithuania's capital Vilnius. By the way, there even is a list of water parks dedicated to such objects with many other examples. -- Pofka ( talk) 18:55, 28 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  @ Pofka: Public facilities are not inhererently notable. I know Respublik provided some, but what are some examples of instances where Vichy Water Park recieved significant coverage in reliable sources? — Prodraxis { talk • contributions} (she/her) 19:30, 28 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  Google search provide 88 200 results (including many English language websites) which proves its notability. -- Pofka ( talk) 19:45, 28 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  Just a clarification that it's a private facility in terms of ownership. The notability of this object is pretty well established and has coverage in every Lithuanian publication. Respublik ( talk) 21:42, 28 June 2023 (UTC) reply

 Comment: Although I am lt-0, I believe I may have found more secondary coverage in https://m.diena.lt/naujienos/vilnius/nusikaltimai-ir-nelaimes/gausios-ugniagesiu-pajegos-leke-prie-vilniuje-esancio-vandens-parko-apdege-pastato-siena-1094705, https://www.15min.lt/verslas/naujiena/bendroves/apsilankyma-vandens-parke-pavadino-tragedija-po-nuviliancios-patirties-ir-chloruoto-vandens-sudirgo-oda-663-2017338 and https://www.delfi.lt/verslas/energetika/vandens-parkas-balansuoja-ties-isgyvenimo-riba-ir-laukia-pagalbos-trumpina-darbo-laika-perziuri-kainas-91183571 from what Google Translate can tell me. Also we might need to keep this per WP:ITSACASTLE. I am thinking about perhaps withdrawing this nomination, but I will try to reach out to Wikiproject Lithuania and Wikiproject Amusement Parks about this to get a couple of other opinions before doing so (or not). — Prodraxis { talk • contributions} (she/her) 00:24, 30 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Comment – Tough to research from my perspective, as I'm not seeing any reliable sites in English. If you filter Google results by "News", I'm only getting 19 results without one reliable source among them. Judging from the aspect of the facility, it is comparable to a Great Wolf Resorts location. We have an article on that company but not on individual locations. While it may be possible to find a burst of news around the time of opening, it is important to be able to show sustained coverage over time. Indoor water parks (and most water parks for that matter) are becoming a dime a dozen that are probably best covered within a wider article topic, such as the companies that build/operate them. -- GoneIn60 ( talk) 01:20, 30 June 2023 (UTC) reply

   Comment: Yeah. I noticed some coverage in Lithuanian but not much in English..... Maybe it fails GNG after all. Honestly, this needs more discussion before deciding to keep or delete. I'm just unsure about this article, AFAIK. It has secondary coverage, but not much in English. — Prodraxis { talk • contributions} (she/her) 01:41, 30 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  What are you talking about? "Sources do not have to be available online or written in English." Respublik ( talk) 18:46, 30 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  Respublik: Re-read my statement carefully. I didn't say they had to be in English. I was saying that from my perspective, not having English sources makes it hard for me to verify. That doesn't mean it CAN'T be verified. My search on Google News failed to provide any reliable hits. -- GoneIn60 ( talk) 18:57, 30 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  My response was to the nominator's comment, not yours @ GoneIn60. Respublik ( talk) 19:03, 30 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  @ Respublik: Yeah, I know sources do not have to be available in English, but I was just pointing out the lack of SIGCOV in English sources. — Prodraxis { talk • contributions} (she/her) 19:10, 30 June 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not entirely clear if the article should be kept or not…
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:34, 4 July 2023 (UTC) reply

• Keep per Prodraxis' 30 June comments about notability. I checked some of the links and they led to articles that appeared to have substantial coverage. (They were completely devoted to this water park but written in Lithuanian, which I do not understand)

On the other hand, there's no corresponding article on the Lithuanian Wikipedia (lt.wikipedia). It's a very active project with over 100,000 articles. What would be the equivalent article, lt:Vichy Vandens Parkas, has been deleted 3 times. I figure they'd have an article if this place is a big deal in Vilnius.

Lithuanian admin Homo ergaster deleted the article there. @ Homo ergaster also edits here on en.wikipedia -- maybe they have some insights.

Finally, I have to give kudos to the nominator, @ Prodraxis, for having an open mind and being willing to reverse himself. Also for doing good research in a very unfamiliar language. Too often, AfDs become a test of wills. It's refreshing to find someone who cares so much about article quality and doing the right thing.

-- A. B. ^{( talk • contribs • global count)} 05:55, 4 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Thank you for the kind words :) IMO, I’m always willing to find alternatives to deletion if possible; Wikipedia is supposed to be a vast database of knowledge, and deletion kinda detracts from that. Also, for future reference, my pronouns are she/her. — Prodraxis { talk • contributions} (she/her) 11:58, 4 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Ooops. Sorry about the pronouns. -- A. B. ^{( talk • contribs • global count)} 12:56, 4 July 2023 (UTC) reply

No problem; sometimes its hard to tell what pronouns someone uses on the Internet. — Prodraxis { talk • contributions} (she/her) 14:57, 4 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Things aren't any clearer than at the first relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:19, 11 July 2023 (UTC) reply

• Lean keep. Likely meets WP:GNG, but the current content is simply a list of rides/attractions. There is a good degree of coverage of the park in the Delfi newspaper, but none of it is reflected here. For example, multiple articles about people getting hurt [3] [4] and the park being fined for safety violations [5]. More recently, the park was struggling post-pandemic [6]. Public-service broadcaster has also covered their post-pandemic struggles [7] [8] and the earlier safety issues [9] [10]. Not that the article should replace a list of rides with a list of problems at the park (there is coverage of its opening [11], special events [12], and economic impact [13], but there's a lot more that should be in the article. (All these articles are in Lithuanian, but Google Translate does a passable job with them.) Regarding the lt-wiki deletions, it looks like the reason was the articles were too commercial/advertisements, so the issue was quality not notablity. — Carter (Tcr25) ( talk) 14:53, 11 July 2023 (UTC) reply

  Yeah, I've kinda changed my mind about this AfD now - I think per WP:ITSACASTLE and per the WP:SIGCOV found in Lithuanian sources it might be a better idea to keep this after all. My initial nomination was hasty; there was SIGCOV, I just didn't find it yet. — Prodraxis { talk • contributions} (she/her) 15:09, 11 July 2023 (UTC) reply

  No troubles. It was a reasonable AfD for the content if not the notability. Per WP:HEY, I've reworked the article to provide more (sourced) background. It's still a stub and I didn't get to adding info about its current situation post-COVID, but it's not the sort of promotional piece that was there before you raised the question. — Carter (Tcr25) ( talk) 16:00, 11 July 2023 (UTC) reply

• Keep per all above. Seems like we've found our way to GNG-land. And I must say, everyone seems awfully civil in here; did I accidentally fall into bizarro AFD? (Since this doesn't seem to have been addressed, I'll mention that the three deletions on LT appear to have been due to advertising/promotional content, which doesn't suggest any particular editorial judgment on the notability of the attraction.) -- Visviva ( talk) 02:21, 13 July 2023 (UTC) reply

  Keep GNG is meeting here. Okoslavia ( talk) 09:04, 13 July 2023 (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.