Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/900 de Maisonneuve West


 * 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--Ymblanter (talk) 10:14, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

900 de Maisonneuve West

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

According to the only WP:RS I can find, this project -- which has been promoted for years -- is still merely proposed. "It will very probably house the relocated headquarters of Standard Life" sounds like obvious WP:OR. It would be great if this were to be built, I suppose, but I just don't think it meets our notability requirements, as of now. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 04:27, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Quebec-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:17, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:17, 17 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, j⚛e deckertalk 01:10, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

 
 * Delete per nom. Proposed but as-yet-unbuilt buildings can pass our notability rules if they're actually the subject of substantial coverage in reliable sources, but this appears not to be (and, for that matter, even built buildings can fail to pass our notability rules if they're not — we most certainly do not have any rule that every building in existence automatically gets an article just because it exists.) In addition, while I suppose I might be confusing it with a different proposed but as yet unbuilt office tower on de Maisonneuve, I actually have a nagging suspicion that we've seen and deleted this before under a different article title. Bearcat (talk) 18:20, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 22:06, 4 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Oh, I do see this recent French-language WP:RS stating the project may be delayed. This could be an example of what Bearcat is talking about re notable unbuilt buildings but I'd still say it's waaaay WP:TOOSOON -- if ever. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:13, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
 * There'd have to be a lot more than one article, though. The new One World Trade Center is probably the textbook example of what I mean when I talk about how a proposed but unbuilt building can already have enough notability to merit an article — it had an article long before construction was even a rumour, because the sheer volume of coverage it garnered just as a proposal (and the reason why it garnered that much coverage in the first place) pushed it over the bar. Bearcat (talk) 23:32, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I wonder if neglected to do a proper search for "Ouest," silly me. Anyway, there's the J de Mtl one above, and this French-language RS. So that's two. And then lots of little mentions like this going back, god, ten years. I still say wait until we get a shovel in the ground because a small building like this isn't going to be like an unbuilt major project, imo. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:00, 5 July 2014 (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.