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 no consensus. While noting that there's no policy for the speedy keep, which is moot anyway since the discussion had been running for approximately two weeks at that point, there is no consensus here and no indication a fourth relist will bring upon any. If further discussion is needed, perhaps the Talk page or a relevant project might find more eyes. Star Mississippi 03:26, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kite Museum (Malacca)[edit]

[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)

Fails WP:ORG and WP:GNG. Reference 1 is its own website, reference 3 is a 1 line mention, reference 4 is a tourist guide listing and reference 5 is a directory listing. Previous AfD is here Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kite Museum. LibStar (talk) 05:33, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Museums and libraries and Malaysia. AllyD (talk) 07:35, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is third nomination for deletion of this article, under slight variations in name. Deletion nominator mentioned first (2015) Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kite Museum but not Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kite Museum (Melaka) of 2020. All three nominations by same editor. --Doncram (talk,contribs) 22:17, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: This is one of three similar articles on several museums located in one former municipal building, see also People's Museum and Beauty Museum. There could be a case for consolidating these in one article (which I notice was suggested by Andrew Davidson in the 2015 AfD on the Kite Museum, as well as being suggested by Kraxler on Talk:Beauty Museum). AllyD (talk) 07:48, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:38, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:43, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, or "Speedy Keep", for all the reasons expressed in latest AFD which was opened by the same deletion nominator, which they may have forgotten (although it was listed on article Talk page). wp:ITSAMUSEUM is an excellent relevant essay. --Doncram (talk,contribs) 22:18, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"an excellent essay" written by yourself... LibStar (talk) 02:07, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 15:49, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. I don't like to do this, and I very rarely do so, but deploying WP:IAR here (which is what WP:ITSAMUSEUM also does, I think) and say that museums are exactly the sort of content that almost always is a net major positive to an encyclopaedia, plus the difficulty in searching Malay sources. The several brief mentions in books is a bit like WP:BASIC for biographies, but applies to museums. My sources:

Frommer's Singapore & Malaysia. (1998). United States: Macmillan.
The Guide to Melaka. (2004). Malaysia: Melaka State Government & Leisure Guide Pub.
Starostinetskaya, A., Pikovsky, F. (2019). Off Track Planet's Southeast Asia Travel Guide for the Young, Sexy, and Broke. United States: Running Press.

CT55555(talk) 16:09, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Are these sources just listings in travel guides rather than indepth coverage? LibStar (talk) 23:08, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

They are nothing more than "brief mentions". CT55555(talk) 18:08, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with People's Museum. The content should probably be documented on Wikipedia somewhere, but the sourcing doesn't seem like enough to have an independent article at this time. The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 02:02, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. It has a separate article, and keeping and developing seems fine. It would be wonderful to expand Wikipedia's coverage of museums in Malaysia, but merging two museums out of 3 which have a presence in one building, and with at least one of these having substantial presence elsewhere, does not appear to make sense to me. People's Museum is complicated; its relationship to the Beauty Museum and to the Kite Museum (Malacca) is unclear (the creator of one or all 3 articles commented in the 2015 AFDs why they decided to keep them separate, though). Also not there is an adjacent park Taman Bunga Merdeka (formerly Coronation Park) which includes railway car(s) and planes; the "transportation section" of the park is part of the People's Museum. In 2015 in conclusion of three AFDs the current deletion nominator was strongly recommended to open a wp:MERGE discussion but did not. All three AFDs that had been opened by this editor then were closed "Keep". Subsequent AFDs opened by deletion nominator in 2020 include: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kite Museum (Melaka), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Petaling Jaya Museum, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Melaka Transportation Museum, which were all closed "Keep". The latter discussion uncovered connection of People's Museum to the planes and trains. Note also Ayer Keroh article includes a table of museums in part of Malacca. It would be good to ~~create~~ expand treatment of museums in List of museums in Malacca and List of museums in Malaysia by making tables and including photos and descriptions. However, having a list-article row does not preclude having separate articles where there's more information. And currently there's more information in the separate article than is included in the list-articles' rows for this museum. "Keep" is how I !voted above, and what I recommend, unless and until there is someone seriously developing sensible treatments. --Doncram (talk,contribs) 11:32, 22 February 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.