Talk:Houses at 37–47 North Fifth Street

Untitled
source to save for history section. Daniel Case (talk) 03:02, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Notability?
What's the argument for notability? Is being on a national register sufficient here, is the register sufficiently exclusive that being registered is notable? Is being a subject of local urban renewal international notability? Can someone clarify? Fifelfoo (talk) 04:40, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * It's been established via past discussions that nearly all NRHPs are inherently notable. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 05:51, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Not in anything under WP:Notability. 80,000 inherently notable encyclopedic entries?  And "Nearly all" is not all.  So where's the policy or the discussion? Fifelfoo (talk) 08:07, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * To expand, checking on your assertion through the project's discussions rather than Wikipedia's notability policies, the archives from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_National_Register_of_Historic_Places demonstrate internal group-think; and begin by making claims such as you did that a previous consensus was achieved within wikipedia; further, the two cases cited where review external to the project occured (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Henry_F._Miller_House) and (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Abbeville_Opera_House) make a seriously flawed claim that the grounds for US government registration are identical with encyclopedic notability. Fifelfoo (talk) 08:25, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * See this, which is explicit on the point. Daniel Case (talk) 18:27, 9 December 2009 (UTC)