Talk:Bellvue-Watson Fish Hatchery

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted from this draft on 17 April 2019 by reviewer Stevey7788 (talk · contribs).

Fisheries and Fishing

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fisheries and Fishing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fisheries, aquaculture and fishing on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fisheries and FishingWikipedia:WikiProject Fisheries and FishingTemplate:WikiProject Fisheries and FishingFishing articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Bellvue-Watson Fish Hatchery.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:06, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Contested deletion

This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because it provides information on various categories, such as Fish hatcheries in the United States, Buildings and structures in Salida, Colorado, Tourist attractions in Colorado. This information is sourced accurately and provides information for the public on the facility while providing blatant facts. --JessicaDerr (talk) 21:04, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Accuracy and informativeness aside, the fishery articles I've tagged so far for deletion give no indication of what is significant about them, what might lead one to think they'd be the topic of an encyclopedia article all their own. Even if someone else feels that such significance is asserted, it doesn't appear to me that any of them meet the notability guidelines that a subject needs to meet to be the topic of an article. At least in online searches, I haven't found any indication of the existence of multiple independent (for example, not Colorado parks websites), reliable sources such as is called for under the general notability guidelines. Even if someone declines speedy deletion, therefore, it seems to me that a full deletion discussion would lead to a consensus of non-notability for the individual hatcheries. Largoplazo (talk) 21:30, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A few of my pages do include outside sources such as news articles or water quality fact sheets. I will be receiving official statements from the Colorado Parks and Wildlife Denver headquarters on overall mission statements for conservation importance. Though, I am sure this does not count as a third-party source. I am doing this for a school project and would like to request the pages to stay up for at least two more days. I feel as though the information provided is important considering the history of buildings and conservation efforts. I am still making edits to all pages, and may even receive white pages and various other sources from CPW that may be third-party sources. I apologize for my misunderstanding of Wikipedia's requirements but I do feel the Colorado hatchery information would be notable once more information is provided. JessicaDerr (talk) 22:44, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]