Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/5151 E Broadway


 * 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   delete. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 15:19, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

5151 E Broadway

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Not all office buildings are notable; in fact, I'd venture that most aren't. This one doesn't appear to be an exception. Here's a picture of the building in question. Built in the '70s, it's the fourth-tallest building in Tuscon, AZ, and that's the only claim of importance in the article. As far as I can tell, this is neither architecturally significant nor the subject of significant coverage in reliable sources. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 02:43, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment.  It does have a page at Emporis and at Skyscraperpage.com.   Both of them state that this is Tucson's largest office building.--Arxiloxos (talk) 03:29, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep, landmarks are considered notable under WP:NPLACE and any building with obvious significant on a city skyline (such as being in the top five by height) would easily be considered a landmark and part of the fundamental character of the city. The article is short and could do with more sources, however a search on GNews shows some prospects so this is a case for improvement rather than deletion discussion. Fæ (talk) 05:47, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:NPLACE only states that landmarks often survive AfD, not that they're automatically notable. I don't really see any non-trivial coverage from reliable secondary sources in the news archives, just mentions in stories about other subjects. The only book mentions are from directories or company addresses. —Torchiest talkedits 12:35, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Or merge with List of tallest buildings in Tucson, as that list has almost all the same information as this article already. —Torchiest talkedits 13:07, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arizona-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:13, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:13, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:23, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Baseball   Watcher  22:26, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. While the building's height might yield some local importance, there is no coverage in WP:GNG to satisfy a claim of encyclopedic notability. Only mentions appear to be tangential, trivially include this in a list of Tucson's tallest buildings, etc. -- Kinu  t/c 01:38, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep- Largest office building in Tucson (meets WP:N), which is duplicated in nearly every reference (and little else). When opened (before official completion same year), 2nd tallest building, never competed for tallest. Offline sources probably exist to include later, even if all are local; may also be covered in Desert Lightning News of nearby Davis–Monthan Air Force Base, but online .pdf archives only go back to 11 Jan 2008. Otherwise, Merge & Redirect to List of tallest buildings in Tucson as valid search term. Dru of Id (talk) 06:00, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep per User:Dru of Id and add sources as noted above. Merge/redirect OK as alternative until this is done. --Arxiloxos (talk) 14:53, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm okay with the proposal to merge/redirect to List of tallest buildings in Tucson until sources can be found to flesh out this article. The small amount of information already present in this article can easily be covered in that one. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 23:06, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Delete: So this is one of the taller buildings in Tuscon? So what?  What black-line rule or guideline accords notability to that?  Could any of the Keep proponents link to it, please?  That sources may exist which satisfy the GNG is not good enough; the GNG is satisfied only by actual sources which discuss the subject in "significant detail," and trivial mentions are specifically debarred.   Ravenswing  02:09, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete as non-notable. There are currently precisely zero sources capable of verifying any of the assertions made about it, let alone any "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" required to establish notability.  Sergeant Cribb (talk) 09:04, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - Being a local landmark would be a reason for keeping this article. But I see no indication that this is a local landmark.  Being a large office building does not make something a landmark, especially given the lack of reliable sources writing about this building. -- Whpq (talk) 14:05, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
 * 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.