This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Architecture, buildings, construction, city planning and public spaces. It is one of many
deletion lists coordinated by
WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.
Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at
WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at
WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Architecture|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
Note that there are a few
scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by
a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove links to other discussions (
prod,
CfD,
TfD etc.) related to Architecture, buildings, construction, city planning and public spaces.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's
deletion policy and
WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.
Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
The tomb lacks wide coverage in RS. Most of the text is covered in
Bodhendra Saraswathi, whose tomb the subject is. The article has little information on the architecture of the tomb, but rather concentrates more on Bodhendra and his death
RedtigerxyzTalk 15:59, 24 May 2024 (UTC)reply
This proposed commuter train station does not pass
WP:GNG or
WP:NSTATION Sources 1, 4, and 5 have
WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS of this planned station in the broader context of the Valley Link system; sources 2 and 3 are primary sources. With this station not scheduled to open until 2028 at the earliest, a standalone article is
WP:TOOSOON. I propose to redirect this page to
Valley Link until there is sufficient SIGCOV in reliable sources to warrant a standalone page.
Dclemens1971 (
talk) 00:54, 18 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Redirect per nomination. Appears to be too soon for a standalone article.
Trainsandotherthings (
talk) 12:21, 18 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep. There are already lots of references, and their number and length will grow as designs are finalized and coverage of the project and individual stations continues. Eastmain (
talk •
contribs) 04:35, 19 May 2024 (UTC)reply
You obviously didn't read them as none of the independent sources say more than a sentence or two about the station, and you're making a very bold assumption about a station not expected to open until near the end of the decade.
Valley Link already exists. But why let facts get in the way of your personal feelings?
Trainsandotherthings (
talk) 12:23, 19 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 02:39, 25 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Fails
WP:GNG and
WP:NPERSON. Lack of quality independent
WP:SIGCOV, some cited awards don't seem to check out. Previously PRODded, no indication that the subject is notable or outstanding in their field. Content is
WP:NOTRESUME. Likely
WP:COI, possibly undisclosed
WP:PAID, the creator appears to work only on topic closely related to the commercial entity that the subject has an interest in.
Melmann 20:41, 17 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment: This is a paid contribution. Please see the user talk page of the creating editor, where they have disclosed the details, albeit imperfectly 🇺🇦
FiddleTimtrentFaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 22:05, 17 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Further to above, the paid disclosure only happened after this nomination and more importantly, after the
WP:PAID edits were made.
Melmann 08:58, 18 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Previously PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option here. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 22:56, 24 May 2024 (UTC)reply
No evidence that this local church passes
WP:GNG or
WP:NORG. All sources cited are affiliated with the church or diocese and thus not independent. A
WP:BEFORE search turns up no additional sources to support notability.
Dclemens1971 (
talk) 15:22, 16 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 05:41, 23 May 2024 (UTC)reply
No evidence that this local church passes
WP:GNG or
WP:NORG. All sources cited are affiliated with the church or diocese and thus not independent. A
WP:BEFORE search turns up no additional sources to support notability.
Dclemens1971 (
talk) 14:47, 16 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 05:40, 23 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Fails GNG, NGEO, NBUILDING. All sources are to news coverage, mostly of crime, that mentions the subject in passing as the location of the crime but does not provide significant coverage. No SIGCOV comes up in a BEFORE search either.
Dclemens1971 (
talk) 16:33, 13 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep They aren't just passing mentions, there are also the article headlines. Plus the fact the place is on the news brings it notability. People in Puerto Rico talk about the place daily. Jeanette Tu Loca Sexy Martin (
aqui?) 19:31, 13 May, 2024 (UTC)
Being in the headline is not the test of
significant coverage. The articles are about other things in the news (crimes, individual people) that happen to mention the event happened/people lived in the Residencial Manuel A. Perez. Those events/people are getting the significant coverage.
Dclemens1971 (
talk) 19:51, 13 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
DoczillaOhhhhhh, no! 01:25, 21 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I appreciate that you have developed an alternative way of thinking about apartment complexes, but at AfD I'm nominating on the basis of official policies, not personal essays that do not represent the consensus of the community.
Dclemens1971 (
talk) 01:28, 21 May 2024 (UTC)reply
WP:MILL structure that fails
WP:GNG and
WP:NGEO. No sources to describe the significance; two news sources provide evidence in cursory coverage that it was constructed but no detail to constitute
WP:SIGCOV.
WP:BEFORE search turns up no additional evidence of notability.
Dclemens1971 (
talk) 00:18, 13 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep Plenty of hits about the clock tower in the Singapore National Library, such as
[1], but it seems you need to open them on-site in order to be able to read the articles. I've been able to pull these up
[2].
Oaktree b (
talk) 01:50, 13 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Thanks for looking at this @
Oaktree b. There are actually numerous merdeka (aka "independence") towers/monuments in Malaysia, and this article is specifically about the one in Kulim. The searches you linked are for other cities' merdeka towers. A search adding "Kulim" brings up just the one cursory result already sourced in the article,
see here. Just sharing in case this info changes your !vote; thanks!
Dclemens1971 (
talk) 02:08, 13 May 2024 (UTC)reply
● Keep - Found a few more sources to establish notability.
Your first source is just a 3D model of the building. What makes you think this is a reliable source or provides significant coverage? What does this add to the article?
Reywas92Talk 15:23, 13 May 2024 (UTC)reply
If found non-notable/deleted, it could be copied entirely into
Kulim District.
CMD (
talk) 07:31, 14 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 02:00, 20 May 2024 (UTC)reply
This is a cancelled proposal. Wikipedia is not a repository for unrealized projects without lasting coverage.
Aintabli (
talk) 05:48, 4 May 2024 (UTC)reply
That's not the best reason for deletion. The tangible topic that exists is the controversy around the plan.
Iskandar323 (
talk) 06:14, 4 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I said without lasting coverage, which addresses that. If this proposal is still discussed years after its cancellation, please let me know. I was unable to find any mention of it past its cancellation in 2018. The Romanian version of this article is even more lacking.
Aintabli (
talk) 06:20, 4 May 2024 (UTC)reply
The closest thing to a keep I can go for at this point is a merge unless someone comes with a better reason to keep.
Aintabli (
talk) 06:24, 4 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 05:46, 11 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Desertarun (
talk) 16:10, 18 May 2024 (UTC)reply