Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Arts

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Shortcut
Deletion Sorting
Project
See More

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Arts. 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:
  1. 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.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Arts|~~~~}} 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.
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 other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Arts. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
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:
Purge page cache watch

Arts

[edit]

Center for Arts Management and Technology

[edit]
Center for Arts Management and Technology (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable research center. No independent and in-depth sources found. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 13:56, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hudson Franklin

[edit]
Hudson Franklin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Recently prodded/deprodded stub article about a short-lived gallery in NYC. In a BEFORE search I was able to find some info about a few of the artists who exhibited at the gallery, but the only thing I could find on the gallery itself is the closure announcement on ArtInfo.[1] I think this is a press release and not actual reporting on the gallery itself as there is no by-line. I found nothing on the Wikipedia Library other than the review of Jamisen Ogg's show (which is about the artist's work not the gallery), and JSTOR turned up nothing. The single ArtInfo piece on the closure is not enough to meet WP:NCORP nor WP:GNG. Bringing it here for the community to decide. Netherzone (talk) 16:16, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen D. Martin

[edit]
Stephen D. Martin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't meet WP:ACADEMIC or WP:GNG. Regarding his medical career, scopus shows 9 publications with an H-index of 9, with most of the citations coming from mid-authorship papers. For example, on his most highly-cited paper (Meltzer et al., 2003) he is one of 88 authors, and is listed only in the trialist, not in the main authors (checking the pdf). Visiting professorship at the University of Sunderland in the 90s doesn't meet the 'named chair' criterion. Other outputs seem typical for a typical academic in the humanities. LTLC flute is very impressive, but performance interpretation/outputs are supported only with self-citations. Klbrain (talk) 19:29, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak Delete. I am having trouble checking his publications; Scopus is often too low. That said, at least two in the page look like comments or just abstracts, plus the claims in the page do not seem to merit consideration as notable.Ldm1954 (talk) 13:59, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Teenage Sex and Death at Camp Miasma

[edit]
Teenage Sex and Death at Camp Miasma (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Filming has not yet begun, per WP:NFF BOVINEBOY2008 08:24, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://x.com/sapphicspielbrg/status/1921957642097889287
  • Comment: I'm a little leery about keeping this based on the current sourcing. While filming has started, that's just the starting line - the moment at which we can start considering if a film's production is notable. There's really no coverage that I can find of the filming. There are some announcements about the cast and so on, but not really anything about the filming. My point here is this: let's assume that either everything stops here or the movie were to get indefinitely shelved and we have zero further coverage of any of this. Or it releases and, despite the involved people, it gets no fanfare or reviews. Would the current sourcing be enough to pass NFILM/NFF? My concern is that we're banking on future coverage to more firmly push this into NFF or NFILM territory. It's just that I've seen films get kept at stages like this, only to end up getting deleted at an AfD further on down the line so there's a risk of kicking the can further down the road and there being additional work to search for sourcing later. I mean, odds are high that this will release and gain coverage, but like I said, there were a lot of other films where this was also assumed and it never released - and not every unreleased film gets Batgirl type coverage. Not saying I'm going to argue against this, just that this should be considered. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 19:45, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I basically agree with you on all this. It's almost certainly going to be finished and will definitely be notable when it does, but it's best to be safe rather than sorry with these kinds of things. Given the borderline nature of this case I can understand some preferring to keep it, but given that there's not that much to cover about the film at this juncture besides the plot synopsis and the director and cast, I don't see much of a reason to not hold the article in draftspace. silviaASH (inquire within) 23:16, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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.

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 13:10, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Liaan Ferreira

[edit]
Liaan Ferreira (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article has been flagged for multiple issues starting in November 2024 without improvement. Having performed a WP:BEFORE I an unable to find references that show that they pass WP:NACTOR. Awards are stated in the article as facts, most are unreferenced. I have examined 100% of the current references and find that none contribute to WP:V of WP:BIO, and I have flagged those I found wanting. My conclusion is that they are decent actor, but a jobbing, WP:ROTM actor, and that we are WP:TOOSOON in their career. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 08:39, 17 May 2025 (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.

Kin'unken

[edit]
Kin'unken (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I did my WP:BEFORE and am nominating it for deletion under the grounds of WP:N. It could barely find any sources in Japanese, and none in English. DankPedia (talk) 02:43, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 03:22, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Queer Contemporary Art of Southwest Asia and North Africa

[edit]
Queer Contemporary Art of Southwest Asia and North Africa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is a student article that has become a bit of a coatrack article with a POV split. The article itself requires a § Terminology section just to define its own criteria and then is otherwise mostly determined by exhibitions and events, festivals and initiatives pertinent to that criteria. Bobby Cohn 🍁 (talk) 20:12, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, I'll vote Draftify per Bearian. Opm581 (talk | he/him) 22:21, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Draftify - while the terminology section is a disaster, it can be fixed and it's not yet the end of the semester. The student editor should be able to fix the mistakes in the article. I think college is all about learning from mistakes. FWIW, I'm a gay man who identifies as "queer". Bearian (talk) 00:28, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Noninator's comment: not opposed to draftify. Bobby Cohn 🍁 (talk) 22:56, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment While I think this article could use some editing, to make it both more concise and easier to read. I don’t think that warrants it being deleted. The information is still useful. Vvbudh (talk) 14:57, 14 May 2025 (UTC) Copied from AfD talk page by Suriname0 (talk), because I think it is appropriate to include here in the main discussion. Vvbudh, you are welcome to vote explicitly in this AfD by writing a comment on this page that begins with '''Keep''' (for example). Suriname0 (talk) 19:13, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep. Somewhat to my surprise a look at the sources shows that this is a topic covered in reliable sources and not simply a synthesis of original research. No need for deletion. Should be kept and improved, or perhaps condensed into a section at Queer art or a similar article. Eluchil404 (talk) 23:13, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, issues with the writing are not a valid reason for deletion. The topic is sufficiently covered in reliable secondary sources (which are in this article) and therefore passes GNG.
(Though I have no prejudice towards merging with Queer art, if others think that's a better idea) ApexParagon (talk) 03:33, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 04:45, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Draftify: in its current form, its an essay and apparently original research. I suggest draftification to give a chance to the author to either split the content to relevant articles, or better delineate the subject for a standalone article. MarioGom (talk) 13:43, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify, possible to make this an article at some point, but i'd rather it remain in Draftspace until its essay tone gets sorted out. -Samoht27 (talk) 16:35, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 13:55, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RoryPhillips(DJ)

Arts Templates for deletion

[edit]

Arts Proposed deletions

[edit]
See also: Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Artists


Visual arts

[edit]

Ariel Schleicher

[edit]
Ariel Schleicher (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unfortunately, I'm not finding anything in a BEFORE search to substantiate the notability of this artist. It appears that this is an autobiography. None of the exhibitions are notable, and I cannot find evidence that their work is held in the permeant collections of notable museums or national galleries, so it's an WP:NARTIST fail. Also not finding that they meet WP:GNG as what is present in current sourcing and what was found in the BEFORE is mostly social media or primary sources such as interviews or user-submitted content. No significant reviews or articles in academic journals or art history books. It seems to be a case of WP:TOOSOON. Bringing it here for the community to decide. Netherzone (talk) 22:46, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hudson Franklin

[edit]
Hudson Franklin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Recently prodded/deprodded stub article about a short-lived gallery in NYC. In a BEFORE search I was able to find some info about a few of the artists who exhibited at the gallery, but the only thing I could find on the gallery itself is the closure announcement on ArtInfo.[2] I think this is a press release and not actual reporting on the gallery itself as there is no by-line. I found nothing on the Wikipedia Library other than the review of Jamisen Ogg's show (which is about the artist's work not the gallery), and JSTOR turned up nothing. The single ArtInfo piece on the closure is not enough to meet WP:NCORP nor WP:GNG. Bringing it here for the community to decide. Netherzone (talk) 16:16, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Teenage Sex and Death at Camp Miasma

[edit]
Teenage Sex and Death at Camp Miasma (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Filming has not yet begun, per WP:NFF BOVINEBOY2008 08:24, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://x.com/sapphicspielbrg/status/1921957642097889287
  • Comment: I'm a little leery about keeping this based on the current sourcing. While filming has started, that's just the starting line - the moment at which we can start considering if a film's production is notable. There's really no coverage that I can find of the filming. There are some announcements about the cast and so on, but not really anything about the filming. My point here is this: let's assume that either everything stops here or the movie were to get indefinitely shelved and we have zero further coverage of any of this. Or it releases and, despite the involved people, it gets no fanfare or reviews. Would the current sourcing be enough to pass NFILM/NFF? My concern is that we're banking on future coverage to more firmly push this into NFF or NFILM territory. It's just that I've seen films get kept at stages like this, only to end up getting deleted at an AfD further on down the line so there's a risk of kicking the can further down the road and there being additional work to search for sourcing later. I mean, odds are high that this will release and gain coverage, but like I said, there were a lot of other films where this was also assumed and it never released - and not every unreleased film gets Batgirl type coverage. Not saying I'm going to argue against this, just that this should be considered. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 19:45, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I basically agree with you on all this. It's almost certainly going to be finished and will definitely be notable when it does, but it's best to be safe rather than sorry with these kinds of things. Given the borderline nature of this case I can understand some preferring to keep it, but given that there's not that much to cover about the film at this juncture besides the plot synopsis and the director and cast, I don't see much of a reason to not hold the article in draftspace. silviaASH (inquire within) 23:16, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Visual arts - Proposed deletions

[edit]

Visual arts - Images for Deletion

[edit]

Visual arts - Deletion Review

[edit]


Architecture

[edit]

Frederick Earl Emmons

[edit]
Frederick Earl Emmons (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The subject receives WP:SIGCOV in only one very specialist regional reliable source, Pacific Coast Architecture Database. WP:GNG requires multiple reliable sources, in practice this means at least two. Following an online search, no further reliable sources, even at a regional level, giving significant coverage have emerged. --Boynamedsue (talk) 00:23, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jahaza:In the UK that result isn't showing up. I suspect there might be some kind of google geoblock going on for the LA Times. Perhaps due to that business a few years back where US websites weren't meeting EU data protection standards?
That source strengthens the case for WP:SIGCOV, but aren't obituaries sometimes paid for in US papers? The fact it only contains interviews with family members is something of a red flag. Could you have a look and see if there is anything else a-couple-of-paragraph-length or longer coming from an LA paper specifically devoted to Emmons and his work rather than his death? If there is I think I should be able to withdraw.--Boynamedsue (talk) 06:18, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • I do see additional sources [5], Eichler: Modernism Rebuilds the American Dream pp. 118-19, and Sunnylands: Art and Architecture of the Annenberg Estate in Rancho Mirage, California p. 5. A difficult one because there's not nothing, but there's not a whole lot, either. I have no opinion since it's possible to make arguments in either direction here, would delete if I had to pick between keep or delete just because GNG might be but is not clearly established. SportingFlyer T·C 04:02, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My view was that those two did not give sigcov.Boynamedsue (talk) 06:06, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dogan Kımıllı

[edit]
Dogan Kımıllı (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. Also violates WP:CoI. Kadı Message 22:56, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tallest structures by category

[edit]
Tallest structures by category (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The encyclopedia already has many, many articles listing tall buildings. The encyclopedia also has many categories related to tall buildings.

This new article has several issues: (a) does not conform to proper title convention (should be "List of ..."); (b) 90% of the facts (rows) do not have any citation validating the facts of the row; and most importantly: (c) this list is duplicative of all the other "tall building" lists already in the encyclopedia... every time a new record is broken, this is one more list to update.

If the consensus is to keep this list, at a minimum it must be properly sourced. There is no lack of sources in the other, existing List articles. Noleander (talk) 18:40, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I posted the above AfD as part of WP:NPP effort. After making the post, I see another editor, User:Remsense had similar thoughts two weeks ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tallest_structures_by_category&diff=1289324742&oldid=1289202581 Remsense deleted the article and replaced it with a redirect to List of tallest buildings and structures. Then, the article creator returned and re-created the article.
Probably should do that same "Delete and redirect" action again. Noleander (talk) 18:44, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep. Although if you'd like to change the article name to List of tallest structures by category, I have no objection to that.
The article says, for example, that the tallest clock tower is the Abraj Al Bait, at 601 meters. It links to an article with a list of the tallest clock towers, and another article all about the Abraj Al Bait. Those other articles have sources. Although if you'd like to add sources here too, I'd be in favor of that.
It's true that this article is a bit duplicative of all the other lists. But I think it's useful having a single article like this to combine them all, and see how each category compares to the other. One more list to update isn't that big a deal.
For those who are just joining us, this article used to be a single section of a larger article titled List of tallest buildings and structures. Here is how it looked when they were together. But it didn't really have anything in common with the rest of that article (which was the history of the world's tallest structures), so this section was recently made into a separate article of its own, and the remainder had its name changed. Remsense thought they should stay together, rather than being separate articles, which we discussed. But I don't think anyone has previously suggested it should be deleted altogether. This information has been on Wikipedia at its prior location for a long time. It does lack references, but it's a good article, it's been pretty high profile, and a lot of people have contributed to it. - Burner89751654 (talk) 20:13, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy keep This isn't a new article, it's a very longstanding article that's been split out to a new name. I don't believe it's duplicative, the creator has been working on improving organziation of tallest building lists recently. More sources are certainly needed but there's no basis for deletion given. Reywas92Talk 04:18, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Franz Abbé

[edit]
Franz Abbé (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NSPORTS due to lack of significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. The only sourcing is Olympedia and SR (which is to say, the same source) both of which do not satisfy WP:NSPORTS.

WP:BEFORE is rendered difficult by the existence of the composer Franz Liszt (known as "Abbé Liszt" due to his monk-like haircut), but nothing found on Google or Internet Archive other than passing mentions.

The DE Wiki article is an object-lesson in why editors should not engage in original research in primary sources: no we are not in the business of piecing together someone's life story based on marriage/death certificates and entries in the address book that could easily be about someone with the same name! The only not-primary sourcing in the DE Wiki article is this passing mention and this passing mention. FOARP (talk) 08:50, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Olympics. FOARP (talk) 08:50, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture and Germany. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:36, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Olympedia gives a decent paragraph, noting among other things that he designed a house that was temporarily the residence of Albert Einstein(!). It seems highly likely there's more to find here. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:12, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    "he designed a house that was temporarily the residence of Albert Einstein(!)" - Beannie, Einstein was a totally unknown student when he lived in a small room in that apartment block. Being the architect of a building that someone who decades later became famous temporarily lived in is not even slightly a plausible claim to notability. FOARP (talk) 08:16, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    While I haven't looked extensively for sources and am currently neutral in this discussion, it should be noted that notability is WP:NOTINHERITED. Let'srun (talk) 13:48, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I never said he "inherits" notability from building a house for Einstein, I only said it strongly indicates there's more to find. BeanieFan11 (talk) 13:53, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Matsya Bhaban

[edit]
Matsya Bhaban (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't appear to satisfy WP:NBUILDING nor does it seem like one of the rare notable road intersections (like, for example, Hollywood and Vine). I'm not seeing anything more than passing mentions in the news. Clarityfiend (talk) 04:20, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chicken Ranch Casino

[edit]
Chicken Ranch Casino (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable resort. Promotional page. Lacks WP:RS. Fails WP:N. Cabrils (talk) 00:51, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - promotional article, I was going to say WP:TNT the article, but theres no notability. ロドリゲス恭子 (talk) 15:22, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alexandre Berardo

[edit]
Alexandre Berardo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:BIO. A co-driver in electric car regularity rally events doesn't get much notice. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:03, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

James C. Ford Memorial Bridge

[edit]
James C. Ford Memorial Bridge (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

very short article which does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NGEO; only sources are a document on the bridge's renaming and a list of local bridges. harrz talk 19:34, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • keep While "very short article which does not meet WP:GNG" the bridge appears to be significant and with sources that are likely out there, it would satisfy Wikipedia:NGEO.19:24, 23 May 2025 (UTC)~

Shaping Seattle: Buildings

[edit]
Shaping Seattle: Buildings (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable local government website. PROD previously declined with a suggestion to merge the content somewhere, but there's no clear place to merge it to -- there's no article for Seattle Department of Construction & Inspections (the agency that runs the website) and it would be WP:UNDUE in the main Seattle or even Government and politics of Seattle articles. Jay8g [V•T•E] 02:30, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Websites, and Washington. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:20, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment the existing references appear to pass GNG, with the King5, GeekWire, and WaPo sites. Have you been able to access and review these? Linkrot appears to have claimed one, and another is paywalled for me. Jclemens (talk) 04:10, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The Washington Post article has two sentences: Seattle, though, has already built a platform tracking new real-estate projects that hints at what could be possible. Projects that have to go through a design review are all mapped by the city here, with each one linked to a timeline, images and public documents. Not exactly WP:SIGCOV. King 5, KPLU, and CityLab are all just regurgitating the press release announcing the website, which also doesn't count towards notability. GeekWire is the only one that comes close, but that article is much more about Seattle in Progress than Shaping Seattle. I haven't been able to find anything else that counts towards notability either, with all of the coverage just being "hey, this exists" regurgitations of the press release from 2015 -- nothing from the decade since then. Jay8g [V•T•E] 07:06, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 11:35, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tianjin Fourth Central Hospital

[edit]
Tianjin Fourth Central Hospital (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Similar to the case of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine First Affiliated Hospital, this hospital also appears to fail WP:GNG. GTrang (talk) 03:58, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Medicine, and China. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:16, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. There is no way a 95-year-old, 880-bed hospital affiliated to (possibly) the best medical university in China is not notable. I'm not going to do a proper source search just this moment, but I will provide references for my claims: [6][7]. Toadspike [Talk] 00:02, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep.This hospital is classified as a Grade A Tertiary Hospital, which means it is one of the highest-level hospitals officially accredited by the Chinese government. It is a non-profit public institution, not commercially operated, and treats tens of thousands of patients annually. Frankly speaking, one reason I focus on writing entries about large public hospitals is to help prevent misleading commercial promotion by smaller private hospitals. The references cited are based on the most authoritative and professional data sources available regarding local healthcare conditions. Has the proposer fulfilled their responsibility in reviewing this content seriously? Have they conducted any academic searches or reviewed relevant literature? I was able to retrieve numerous academic papers through Google Scholar. Or is the proposer simply speculating based on personal unfamiliarity? Such an attitude is neither friendly nor consistent with the rigor and responsibility that this task requires.--Amazingloong (talk) 15:48, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cinder painter (talk) 06:21, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 19:40, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Architecture Proposed deletions

[edit]


Categories

[edit]

Requested moves

[edit]

See also

[edit]

Transcluded pages

[edit]

The following pages are transcluded here following from relationships among WikiProjects

Other pages

[edit]

Wikipedia:Wikiproject deletion sorting/visual arts Wikipedia:Wikiproject deletion sorting/architecture

((Category:Wikipedia deletion sorting|arts)) ((Category:wikiproject arts|deletion))

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Arts&oldid=1291839565"