The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Comment Lack of references is not a good reason to nominate for deletion. I was able to find a number of references in Google Books and newspapers.com. There's a good summary in this Fire Department issued book
[1] and the FEMA report on the fire is online
[2]. Here's some news coverage in 1989
[3][4] and a year later in 1990:
[5][6]. There are also some articles indicating the city considered changing its sprinkler rules for older buildings as a result of this fire, and what impact that would have on building owners. The building itself has a current website to speak to the current state of the building and so on. --
Krelnik (
talk) 20:03, 8 October 2020 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanamonde (
Talk) 18:57, 12 October 2020 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
TheSandDoctorTalk 05:42, 20 October 2020 (UTC)reply
comment This is an article about the fire, and if kept, needs to be renamed to reflect that. The building seems otherwise unremarkable.
Mangoe (
talk) 19:58, 24 October 2020 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.