Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kékestető TV Tower

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 speedy keep. Withdrawn by nominator with no delete !votes (non-admin closure) Deadbeef 19:34, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kékestető TV Tower (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

no indication of notability. [ UseTheCommandLine ~/talk ]# ▄ 03:03, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hungary-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 04:32, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 04:33, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, if someone can reference the claim "The mast offers the highest public accessible observation deck in Hungary, being situated 134 metres (440 ft) above ground." with a reliable source. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 09:59, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, per Lukeno94. This article meets the criteria of notability. --Norden1990 (talk) 17:42, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can you provide some references? Luken094 said keep only IF sources can be found. I couldnt find any sources, and that's why i nominated it. -- [ UseTheCommandLine ~/talk ]# ▄ 18:26, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment There is a tourism website that states that the open lookout is at 45m, and a restaurant at 42m. This information is reflected in the Hungarian Wikipedia article. This is lower than the observation deck in Pecs which is at 80m. So the claim that it would be the highest observation deck relative to the base of the structure is not verified. However, the tower is on top of the highest mountain in Hungary, so that it is naturally "the highest public accessible observation deck in Hungary" relative to sea level. --ELEKHH^T 02:25, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The tourism websites and the hungarian wikipedia are both non-RS. -- [ UseTheCommandLine ~/talk ]# ▄ 04:56, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, but there is no incentive for any tourism website to play down the height of the outlook, and the Hungarian Wikipedia would naturally have more editors with linguistic skills to access RS. Plus all this is simply consistent with the previous comment that there are no RS to confirm the claim in its current form. The question is: is it notable for being the highest outlook platform in Hungary relative to sea level? Would a similar condition make a structure notable in another region? --ELEKHH^T 06:35, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also noting that if the height of the observation deck would be 134m as stated in the article while the tower is 178m, that would place the deck at a height equalling 75% of the total height. Looking at this image that's clearly not the case. I think is pretty safe to dismiss that unreferenced claim. --ELEKHH^T 06:59, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:NRVE. -- [ UseTheCommandLine ~/talk ]# ▄ 13:40, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I do not understand what you mean with that link. Can you be more explicit? --ELEKHH^T 22:40, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It has no inherent notability, because of its height or otherwise. Unless reliable sources (a tourist website might be sometimes, but that one doesn't look like one, more like a blog) can be found that establish notability, it doesn't matter what its height is. -- [ UseTheCommandLine ~/talk ]# ▄ 22:56, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I was only hinting towards potential directions of research, given that not many Hungarian sources are available online (see also Wikipedia:Systemic bias). The tower is clearly a tourist attraction, being briefly mentioned in Lonely Planet and other guides as well as the tourism board website. --ELEKHH^T 00:01, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I would like to expand this article (i have a reliable source and pictures).--Rovibroni (talk) 15:48, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Could you list the source here, please? :) Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 17:33, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• I found some useful infomation in this book: Antal Papp: Magyarország (Hungary), Panoráma, Budapest, 1981, ISBN 963-243-241-X, p. 860, pp. 299-300. It is a detailed travel book (near 1000 pages with maps and pictures). Kékes TV tower (finished in 1981) is a very important radio and DVB-T transmitter, so there are some technical information in these websites: Hungarian TV towers/Kékes, Hungarian DVB-T service --Rovibroni (talk) 20:08, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Withdraw as nominator, per links provided and Rovibroni's assertion of RS/pics/desire-to-improve. -- [ UseTheCommandLine ~/talk ]# ▄ 18:19, 2 September 2013 (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.