Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unicorn museum
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 delete. The article as it stands now has only the "mainstream media attention" it has gotten -- a large Norway newspaper and a blog -- and the same information already available in the Creation Museum article. If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 03:41, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
- (And redirect to This Week In Science). Sorry about that. If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 03:42, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Unicorn museum
Tagged as Speedy, I think it's borderline. Bringing here. humblefool® 16:27, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
-
- Delete - I tagged it as speedy. There are no independent reliable third party sources mentioning this website - google only has a list of blogs and chat rooms. And there aren't even that many of them. The page has potential for notability, however, it has yet to even reach the stage of internet cultism (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zeitgeist the Movie), let alone third party reliable sources. The Evil Spartan 16:36, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
- Comment — Unfortunately I can't support a keep on this one because of lack of notability. But it's an excellent idea for a tongue-in-cheek museum! — RJH (talk) 16:43, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
- Merge and redirect to Creation Museum. I found one source[1], but it really isn't enough for a standalone article. Clarityfiend 16:44, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
- Clarityfiend, that "news story" links back to the main website. That's not an independent link at all. And, for that matter, why would we want to include a non-notable website in the criticism section of creation museum? The Evil Spartan 16:59, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
Strong Keep A real museum, funded with $27,000,000; occupying 60,000 sq.ft. and only recently opened ("Grand opening" article is dated August 9, which was Thursday), not much more recent than the May opening of the Creation Museum. As such, I think it's too early to start counting Ghits and the like for "notability". Frankly, I think that opponents of both the "Creation Museum" and the "Unicorn Museum" (and I'm referring to protestors, not to anyone who is voting on this article) forget the old American adage, "It's a free country." Bravo to both museums!Mandsford 17:38, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
-
- No it's not. The first paragraph comes right out and says "The Unicorn Museum is a parody website based on the Creation Museum, a $27 million museum in the United States designed to promote young Earth creationism." The 27 million dollars refers to the Creation museum. Sheesh. (And even if it was, we could delete it as a hoax, as there's not a single reliable source verifying this claim). The Evil Spartan 18:05, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
- Delete and Thank you to Spartan. I'm not too proud to leave up evidence of my stupidity
with a line run through it. Looking back on it, I guess that would have been pretty quick construction. - Question Hi all - I'm part of the team that built the Unicorn Museum parody website. I'm not familiar with proper posting practices on Wikipedia, but we'd like to keep this page in the system and will make any changes you suggest to make this happen. With regards to the notability of the site, the site has been live for a little over a week and we've already received mentions in several prominent science blogs plus have elicited commentary from Creation Museum founder Ken Ham. Here are some of the third-party sites currently mentioning the Unicorn Museum:
- http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/08/but_unicorns_are_real.php
- http://www.badastronomy.com/bablog/2007/08/09/godtm/
- http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/aroundtheworld/2007/08/11/breaking-records-at-the-creation-museum-2/
- http://skepchick.org/blog/?p=644
- http://exploringourmatrix.blogspot.com/2007/08/unicorn-museum.html
- http://donoevil.netscape.com/story/2007/08/09/unicorn-museum-grand-opening
- http://reddit.com/info/2d30z/comments
Can these be used as references to help demonstrate the notability of the Unicorn Museum website? Let me know and I'll make any necessary changes. Thanks User:TWIS 20:35, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
- The most I think we could help would be for you to take a look at WP:WEB. It you can show the site passes these criteria, it should be worth a keep. The Evil Spartan 23:50, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
- We just got a mention in Dagbladet this morning (one of Norway's largest newspapers) and have been covered by Pharyngula (listed by the science journal Nature as the top-ranked blog written by a scientist [1])User:TWIS 16:16, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Additional images
- Delete per lack of notability. Blogs/forums etc do not qualify as reliable sources Corpx 06:28, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
- Merge and redirect to Creation Museum per Clarityfiend. Having said that however... it could likely change in the future due to how recent this site is. Mathmo Talk 08:11, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
- Merge and redirect to This Week in Science. The Unicorn museum website does not seem to be notable in and of itself, but as an initiative of the This Week in Science program, it's an item worth including in the article about the program. It's already nicely documented in Creation Museum, which would make a confusing destination for the redirect.--orlady 17:55, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
- Delete as per Corpx Harlowraman 03:25, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
- 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.
