Deletion of Steam into History (2nd nomination)

Comment: I'll accept the assertion that this page was created to promote a tourist railroad on an abandoned stretch of track in Pennsylvania. But I am frankly puzzled by this nomination.  This tourist attraction is real. The 2013 opening was covered in major  dailies like the Baltimore Sun http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2013-06-13/news/bs-md-backstory-railroad-20130613_1_reader-railroad-engine-york-county.  It gets regular newspaper coverage  in reliable dailies, news google search https://www.google.com/#q=%22new+freedom%22++steam+railroad&tbm=nws.  That search was on "new freedom" + steam + railroad, but it turned up articles in multiple newspapers.   A search on "Steam into History" turns up other articles in other papers and media https://www.google.com/#q=%22steam+into+history%22&tbm=nws.  Coverage in RS is significant, in-depth, and ongoing, with stories not only about the museum's opening, but about it's new acquisitions in the time since it opened, http://www.ydr.com/story/news/2016/03/06/steam-into-history-shows-off-new-locomotive/81406332/ and about it as a tourist attraction near Gettysburg  that appear in papers further afield.http://www.buffalonews.com/life-arts/one-tank-trips/get-ready-for-the-holidays-in-gettysburg-yes-gettysburg-20151129  It passes 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: If you "accept the assertion that this page was created to promote a tourist railroad", then you see why I nominated the page, so I don't particularly appreciate the ''ad hominem'' as to how you can't understand my actions.  The news articles you cite as GHits are ''all local'', and by the way, you can do that search from the top of the AfD - you're not breaking new ground or creating an aha! moment that you insinuate I forgot.  As for ongoing "stories" (plural), I see one local story on one locomotive, not multiple sources talking about this acquisition - don't misrepresent the extent of coverage.  As for "news farther afield" GNG still requires substantial coverage, and a few lines in a larger travel article on the area is not substantial coverage.  That's the crux of the notability problem - local coverage is still local coverage, and  isn't valid - there's quite a few redlinks on that heritage railroad list, too, because 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS||WP:ENN)