Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hispanic Garden

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) Tymon.r Do you have any questions? 09:52, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hispanic Garden

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

This Article has nothing but a promotion of a place or playground. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iamzine13 (talk • contribs) 22:25, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:17, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 11:10, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 11:10, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Archaeology-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 11:10, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and improve, meets WP:GNG with reasonable coverage from secondary WP:RS. Flapjacktastic (talk) 11:52, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, a lot of reliable sources (WP:RS) can be found about it. There's even a postcard of the area on Florida Memory. – The Grid (talk) 13:27, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete there is no general notability for this place. Trillfendi (talk) 22:20, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 07:29, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment nominator has been blocked for sockpuppetry. Flapjacktastic (talk) 08:40, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:09, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep; somewhat confused by the nominator's position to delete, but the article is generally covered well be reliable sources. Adog (Talk・Cont) 17:30, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator is now blocked indef as a sockpuppet account. Incoherent nomination is one of a string of similarly bad AFD nominations. Flapjacktastic (talk) 19:23, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for notifying, it seemed uncanny. Adog (Talk・Cont) 22:50, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as has substantial coverage in multiple reliable sources already present in the article such as the Florida Times and others so passes the requirements of WP:GNG and deserves to be included, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 13:32, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, Doncram (talk) 01:28, 19 March 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.