Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/One Theater Square

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 keep. Consensus that sourcing requirements are met (non-admin closure) Nosebagbear (talk) 22:02, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

One Theater Square

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

One Theater Square (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable under WP:NBUILD. This is nothing more than a luxury apartment building. The sources provided are exclusively local. Borderline WP:PROMO Rusf10 (talk) 21:52, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 22:17, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 22:18, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Keep. Uh, what about all the references included in the article, including 2 New York Times articles? How do they not obviously satisfy wp:GNG? --Doncram (talk) 07:07, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Teachers Village, Newark: same deletion nominator, similar apparent will to waste others' time. --Doncram (talk) 07:23, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
New York Times = local coverage. New York Times does not = automatic notability. Also, you made another WP:PERSONALATTACK--Rusf10 (talk) 14:38, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
NYT is headquartered in Manhattan, which is 2,000,000 to 3,000,000 people away from Newark. NYT may be delivered in Newark, I am not sure, but it is also delivered to cities nationwide and delivered online. It is a bit ridiculous to treat NYT coverage in this case as if it is a local and non-reliable source. And there are many other reliable sources, which you do not comment on, may I assume you did not check any sources cited in the article? You need to understand GNG by now. It does appear to be an obvious waste of other peoples' time, to me. --Doncram (talk) 01:47, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Over 8 million people live in New York City and 285,000 live in Newark. What the hell does that have to do with anything? Newark is roughly five miles away from New York. How much more local can you get? And yes, you can get the New York Times delivered in Newark. The other sources are also local such as the Star Ledger (that one is based in Newark), the NY Daily News, and a local television station. There's also a few press releases thrown in (they can be ignored for our purposes) WP:GNG alone does not establish notability, rather it just creates a presumption of notability. How does this building meet WP:NBUILD?--Rusf10 (talk) 02:10, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Article is clearly supported by local, state-wide, regional, and national sources, which clearly speak to the historic, social, economic, or architectural importance.Djflem (talk) 09:13, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Shame that the nominator has clearly decided to not see or ignore Wikipedia:NEXIST and the The Real Deal (magazine), GlobeSt.com, Building Design+Construction, The Philadelphia Inquirer references and apparently ignore the fact the building has had Wikipedia:SUSTAINED coverage in the NY Times, which besides being a international newspaper is a New York metropolitan area regional newspaper and the Star-Ledger, which is a statewide newspaper. Djflem (talk) 14:40, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • KEEP Completed in 2018, it is the first newly-constructed high-rise apartment building to built in the city of Newark in more than fifty (50) years, which is significant, symbolic, notable and historic and representative of the re-investment in a city that has been known for urban-decline, and is undergoing a often-touted, but only recently fulfilled renaissance. Statewide, regional, and national sources support thisDjflem (talk) 07:21, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep.The building is notable in the city and has a history. The article needs to bring some more specific characteristics of the building.Alex-h (talk) 13:11, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep – Per a source review, meets GNG and squeaks by WP:AUD. North America1000 13:30, 9 March 2019 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/One_Theater_Square&oldid=886991168"