Talk:Guggenheim Guadalajara

.
This is not the rendering of the project that won the design competition by TEN Arquitectos, I believe this was the proposal by Asymptote... This should not be the main reference image used unless there is an image of the winning/anticipated project, then a sub category for the other competition entries.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.178.99.190 (talk) 15:24, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

I have taken the liberty of removing the image from this article, given that it is not an image of the winning project by Norten. I will try to find a suitable image for this article. Gabsvillalobos (talk) 17:57, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Article Deletion
This article is not particularly relevent to anything. It contains little information that actually exists. It is simply an idea, one that didn't even come to fruition. It isn't even akin to a wikipedia page for a character in a TV series, because even though that too is fiction, it is a work that many people (the viewers) would recognise, and has a greater significance in culture and knowledge. This article is worthless. 86.181.202.45 (talk) 21:14, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * The story of this museum is quite relevant to the period of international museum expansion led by Thomas Krens and the Guggenhiem museum. There is more than sufficient published material about the proposed museum to remedy any defects in the current article.  That it was never built is of no consequence one way or another, since existence isn't a criterion for Wikipedia articles.  The Guggenheim Guadalajara easily exceeds the criteria in Notability, namely significant coverage in independent, reliable sources.You could propose deletion if you wish, but I'd expect no chance of success. A better use of time would be to look at the book, magazine and newspaper articles about the Guggenheim Guadalajara and use them to improve the article.--Dbratland (talk) 22:57, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree that this article is non-notable and should be deleted. All it says is that there was a proposal that was ultimately abandoned. So what?  I went ahead and proposed it for deletion. -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:20, 17 March 2014 (UTC)