Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Modern (building)

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 was that the building passes WP:GNG. (non-admin closure) Rollidan (talk) 21:28, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Modern (building)

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

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet WP:NBUILD guidelines for inclusion of buildings. Also may violate WP:NOTPROMO. Rusf10 (talk) 00:36, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Rusf10 (talk) 00:36, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. Rusf10 (talk) 00:36, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The twin towers notable as result of their historic, social, economic, or architectural importance. They are the tallest buildings in Fort Lee and among tallest buildings in New Jersey and tallest twin buildings in the world.Djflem (talk) 04:36, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

" historic, social, economic, or architectural importance", which one? all of them? (or more likely, none of them). Also, the buildings do not rank that high on either list and inclusion on such lists do not mean that they are notable enough to get their own article.--Rusf10 (talk) 06:04, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

See List of tallest buildings in Fort Lee, where it ranks the highest.Djflem (talk) 09:30, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

None of the other buildings on that list have articles, so it may be eligible for deletion. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 19:40, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That is not a reason for deletion, and that is not a helpful impulse. Having list-articles allows coverage of notable or lesser/marginal items instead of creating separate articles. If you are inclined to delete stuff, then you should support list-articles. Or do you want me or anyone else to create seven or so separate articles right away to fight your impulse to delete the list-article? --Doncram (talk) 20:00, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep sourcing passes WP:GNG.E.M.Gregory (talk) 19:57, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep well sourced article about a notable subject. Lubbad85 (☎) 18:53, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per User:E.M.Gregory. --Doncram (talk) 20:00, 21 June 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.