Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alcoa House (Portland, Oregon)


 * 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 merge to Alcoa Care-free Homes. Guerillero Parlez Moi 12:08, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Alcoa House (Portland, Oregon)

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

This house was not on any historical register, was not a place of any historical events, and has (and will likely only ever have) a single article by an independent secondary source. The Alcoa house was one of 24 similar houses and its only arguable notability was that this was the only one in Oregon. I can see an argument for notability for an article about Alcoa houses in general, but not one specific example out of 24. A search online shows no other coverage of this home than the Oregonian article. WP:NBUILD states buildings "require significant in-depth coverage by reliable, third-party sources to establish notability" with an emphasis on plural "sources" as explicitly stated in WP:ONESOURCE: "a subject for which only one source can be cited is unlikely to merit a standalone article" PDXBart (talk) 21:43, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions. Kbabej (talk) 22:14, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Kbabej (talk) 22:15, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

NOTICE It appears the creator of the article has not been informed of this AfD as required.Djflem (talk) 10:51, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Relisting comment: I see split consensus between Keeping the article and Merging it with Alcoa Care-free Homes. Let's give it another week to solidify. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:40, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. In addition to the two sources from The Oregonian currently used in the article, there's an article from Realtor here. The Realtor source is not a listing; it is an article with a byline that is solely about the subject. The Oregonian did another piece on the house here, asking if it could have been saved from demolition. It was named by Pamplin Media Group as one of Portland's "Magnificent Modern Seven" here. Given that coverage, and the fact it was Portland's only Alcoa home, I believe this meets GNG. --Kbabej (talk) 22:38, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
 * An article written by a realtor as a companion to its listing is not a reliable or independent source per WP:RS.
 * The Pamplin article is pretty clearly WP:TRIVIALMENTION
 * "Portland's only Alcoa home" - again, I don't think being unique to the state adds notability. There are hundreds or thousands of unique houses to the state and not every one needs a Wikipedia article.
 * I think it's debatable whether the extra Oregonian article written one week after the original and provides no additional information counts as evidence for notability.
 * The essential argument for me was that this house had absolutely no notability or coverage prior to being demolished. The event of the house being demolished is more notable than the house itself, and the Wikipedia article isn't about the demolition. PDXBart (talk) 23:27, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi @PDXBart. To address your points:
 * Claudine Zap, the author of the Realtor article is a freelance writer and editor, not a realtor. That's why I pointed out the byline and stated it was an article, not in any way a listing. She's written for Realtor, Yahoo, New York Post, and SFGATE.
 * The Pamplin article is about the "Magnificent Modern Seven", during which the subject is discussed. I do not agree that it's trivial, given the article is dedicated to these seven homes. It's not a passing mention.
 * There is no guideline on time spacing of articles when looking at RS requirements. It's a separate article, and therefore counts toward notability.
 * The house existed as the sole Alcoa house in PDX (Oregon?) when it was built. That is the notability, and the demolition discussion only adds to it, IMO.
 * Happy to discuss further. Cheers! --Kbabej (talk) 23:35, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the thoughtful feedback Kbabej. PDXBart (talk) 23:40, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment for what it is (less than 10 lines of text), we can copy it to the Alcoa article. There likely won't be much more published about it and it's been demolished. Oaktree b (talk) 23:34, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi @Oaktree b. The sourcing I've identified above can definitely flesh out the article. Stubs are incredibly common across WP, and this just needs expanded. The Realtor article is helpful, as is the third Oregonian piece. --Kbabej (talk) 23:37, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for mentioning the Alcoa article - I had searched and failed to find that. I think a merger is more appropriate than deletion PDXBart (talk) 23:40, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Merge >>>Alcoa Care-free Homes Djflem (talk) 22:26, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep (disclaimer: stub creator) per Kbabej and nominator's own comment "I think a merger is more appropriate than deletion". I'd rather see this content fleshed out and/or possibly merged than deleted altogether. This could have been discussed on the talk page. Again, I'd encourage the nominator to stop jumping to AfD so quickly. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 14:38, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Merge: to Alcoa Care-free Homes per Nom and as ATD. --  Otr500 (talk) 01:54, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Merge to Alcoa Care-free Homes per above discussion. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 23:47, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Merge The topic would benefit from the context provided about the homes in general. MrsSnoozyTurtle 08:47, 19 August 2022 (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.