The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman ( talk) 00:14, 18 April 2009 (UTC) reply
Building with no assertion of notability Ironholds ( talk) 13:41, 11 April 2009 (UTC) reply
*Delete since the article does nothing to establish the subject's notability.
Cordless Larry (
talk) 14:36, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
reply
This isn't a matter of courtesy, or a matter of other editors condescending to look for sources as some sort of favour to an article's creator. (Regarding helping to improve articles created by other people as a some kind of favour to other editors is rather missing the point of this being a collaboratively-written encyclopaedia, and is based upon an erroneous assumption that creators own articles.) This is a matter of ensuring that we come to the correct result so that the encyclopaedia gets better and deletion policy is followed, given that (quite obviously) no one editor has access to the entire corpus of human knowledge, or indeed to every source in the world. Looking for sources is not Somebody Else's Problem. The proper study of encyclopaedists is the finding, reading, evaluating, and using of sources. We are all included in the "finding" part. Uncle G ( talk) 22:01, 11 April 2009 (UTC) reply
Strong Keep: Clearly been vastly improved since nomination. Thanks Uncle G. Looking at this AfD, looks like a keep is imminent; now it's just a formality. Daniel Christensen ( talk) 00:06, 12 April 2009 (UTC) reply
Keep The Hyatt Regency Birmingham article has already been deleted once and has been recreated. More information about the hotel has been posted on this page and it should not be deleted a second time. 206.255.176.234 ( talk) 01:40, 13 April 2009 (UTC) reply
Note: I added a reference to emporis.com where it said citaion needed. Why was such a basic piece of info (the height) not already footnoted????? Daniel Christensen ( talk) 03:00, 13 April 2009 (UTC) reply