Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roadside attraction

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) Szzuk (talk) 15:32, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Roadside attraction

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

Delete Not notable and unreferenced. There is no source proving that a roadside attraction would become popular in the late 1930s. There is no proof that they are advertised with billboards. There is also no source indicating what a "roadside attraction" actually means. It does attract tourists but it doesn't have a source to prove it. Evil Idiot (talk) 12:14, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2018 April 6. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 12:30, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

blazingly obvious keep Yeah, it's poorly sourced, but if the nominator thinks this isn't a notable topic, they need to get out and read some. And take a trip to Wall Drug. Mangoe (talk) 12:46, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep -- As Mangoe says the sourcing leaves much to be desired, but there are significant sources in the world. See e.g. New Encyclopedia of Southern Culture not to mention innumerable guidebooks. 192.160.216.52 (talk) 13:55, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I have added several sources, including inline citations. RockMagnetist(talk) 19:55, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Passes WP:N. See [1] for starters. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:26, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 12:58, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, meets WP:GNG, plenty of useable citations available, article now has some, lots of books discuss subject, article lists some, here are a couple more 125 Wacky Roadside Attractions, Minnesota Marvels: Roadside Attractions in the Land of Lakes. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:21, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:25, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:25, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:25, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This was clearly an issue of sourcing not notability. WP:NOT#DICTIONARY doesn't apply as the concept goes beyond just the definition. The term is in wide use over several decades across at least two continents. There are even Wikipedia categories for roadside attractions (not an indicator of notability but does show just how common this term is). freshacconci (✉) 13:34, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I drove past Wall Drug in 1993 and still feel the attraction.Nominator must not have ever been on a long car trip. There is voluminous literature on the theory of such attractions. No brainer keep. 104.163.158.37 (talk) 06:36, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This article does need improvement, but it is about a real and reliably sourceable concept. Bearcat (talk) 17:54, 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.