Steve Bennett wrote:
But you question whether it's even encyclopedic. Apply the specialist encyclopaedia test: would a specialist encyclopaedia about skiing in North America list this ski area? It ought to. So the answer is yes.
Hmm, could be wrong, here's a webpage says "Kettlebowl: World’s Greatest Family Ski Hill". Oh, no, look who wrote that though ...
I don't ski. You are partly arguing that there should not be a notability guideline for skiing sites. And partly that a specialist skiing encyclopedia should be a directory of just about all skiing sites. I'm not really in a position to argue, since I'm not familiar with that sector of reference literature. The usual test is that there is such a book and it does include Kettlebowl.
I would certainly argue that
- Kettlebowl the hill as geographic feature is probably a topic to include, just that it should be treated as such without the promotional overlay this guy wants about it; - If the material on Kettlebowl had been placed in [[Bryant, Wisconsin]], we would have had one better article, not two scrappy ones.
I think skiing fans should not be allowed to chip away at minimum standards for inclusion just because they are, well, fans of skiing. WP:NOT says WP is not a directory, after all.
Charles
http://www.uptake.com/blog/family_vacations/kettlebowl-worlds-greatest-family-ski-hill_1930.html