Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Badin Hall (University of Notre Dame) (2nd nomination)


 * 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 keep. Consensus is GNG met 78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 13:41, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Badin Hall (University of Notre Dame)
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log )

Was AfD'd back in 2013, and nothing really has changed since then. While it is part of a historic district, it itself is not on the NRHP. Currently the vast majority of the article is primary sourced, and there is not enough in-depth coverage to pass GNG. Part of several articles which have all be recreated after AfD. I'll be sending them all to AfD, but did not feel bundling was appropriate, since all should be evaluated individually.  Onel 5969  TT me 14:25, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
 * But all highly related AFDs should be linked. And it is generally a waste of time to run many similar AFDs at the same time...test the waters with one or two and drop your quest if you don't get agreement.
 * To AFD partipants and potential closers, please see, at least (and please notify all of us of any more):
 * Articles for deletion/Alumni Hall (University of Notre Dame) (2nd nomination)
 * Articles for deletion/Badin Hall (University of Notre Dame) (2nd nomination)
 * Articles for deletion/Keenan Hall
 * Articles for deletion/Carroll Hall (University of Notre Dame)
 * --Doncram (talk) 04:51, 21 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Redirect to University of Notre Dame residence halls. There is no reason for a seperate article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:40, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 15:40, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Indiana-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 15:40, 15 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep The residential college is in itself notable. The building, built in 1897, is over a hundred years old and hosted the Manual Labor School of Notre Dame founded in 1843. It was the first residential hall to host women on the campus of the University of Notre Dame. Throughout its long history it has hosted several notable people and events. It was also part of the United States Naval Reserve Midshipmen's School program during Worl War II. The building was listed in the National Register of Historic Places with reference number ID78000053 in 1978. Its long history is well sourced, as well as it role in the university's history. Eccekevin (talk) 17:33, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Redirect to University of Notre Dame residence halls: Article does not have SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. None of the above keep votes have been able to show this has SIGCOV or any reason based in guidelines why this should be a stand alone article. The building does not inherit notability from the area it is in or subjects it is associated with. The OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument above is invalid. The keep claims have to resort to OTHERSTUFF exists or inherited notability claims which shows clearly there is no SIGCOV or support in guidelines. This is one of 31 halls, by the above reasoning all these buildings would be notable, even though they do not have SIGCOV. If IS RS with SIGCOV can be found, the subject is best covered in the target.  // Timothy :: talk  09:15, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
 * The page is full of sources, most of them independent from the Hall, that provide good SIGCOV. And the fact alone that is is on the National Register of Historic Places makes it notable, especially given the age of the building. Eccekevin (talk) 09:23, 16 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Note to closer about canvasing: Unfortunately Eccekevin is canvasing for participation in this AfD. ,.  // Timothy :: talk  10:33, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I am not canvassing, I am reaching out to project members for help collecting sources in line with WP:APPNOTE. Eccekevin (talk) 10:37, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , that's called canvassing.  Onel 5969  TT me 12:37, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note to closer This is incorrect, I never reached out for anyone's vote, in accordance with WP:APPNOTE and WP:CANVASS.Eccekevin (talk) 18:47, 16 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep, the same as with the other 3 dorms that were AfD'd, these dorms are part of the NRHP district that is historical in every sense of the word. There are other sources used, in addition to the NRHP, including the State of Indiana, the NPS, several Catholic publications, and various books, etc. This campus is one of the most visited sites in the state of Indiana, because of its various venues (football stadium included). I don't think that this article should be deleted. Funandtrvl (talk) 18:01, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , can you point to the sources that provide direct and indepth coverage of the subject required by SIGCOV? It is obvious not everything in a historic district is notable, that this is a popular part of campus does not mean it is notable.  // Timothy :: talk  18:33, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Just some of them are the 1917 Irish Standard article written about its construction, history, and dedication ,1947 South Bend Tribune article profiling the hall for its 50th anniversary, the 1954 South Bend Tribune article describing it and its history , its architectural and historical decription in Recreation in the United States: National Historic Landmark Theme Study , and its history and description in Arthur Hope's book about the university , and not to mention the many many articles profiling it, its architecture, history, and traditions in depth from sources connected to Notre Dame (although many of them independent and with no connection to the Hall), including its extensive treatment in Thomas Blantz's The University of Notre Dame : a history (2020) . Also, it is listed as Historic Structure in the NRHP listing. Hence, it definitely meets WP:BUILD.Eccekevin (talk) 03:18, 17 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Note to closer: The above editor was canvassed for there vote .  // Timothy :: talk  18:40, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note to closer, I was not canvassed., according to WP:APPNOTE, I'm a concerned editor who is a member of the article's WikiProject, and has expertise in the subject. Funandtrvl (talk) 16:36, 17 March 2021 (UTC) --Also, I have taken note that in the one AfD where my opinion matched the person saying that I was canvassed (Keenan Hall), that he did not point out after my commentary that I was canvassed. But, in each article that I didn't agree with him, he did point that out. (Badin, Carroll and Alumni). Funandtrvl (talk) 16:42, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Everything listed as NRHP is notable per Inherent_notability. Eccekevin (talk) 18:46, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
 * This is in a historic district; not everything in a historic district is notable and that essay is a personal opinion, not a Wikipedia guideline.  // Timothy :: talk  18:50, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Sure, but Badin Hall is explicitly listed as a contributing property and has its own description and listing in the NRHP, hence it does aquire inherent notability. Eccekevin (talk) 18:53, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
 * The essay you are citing is a personal opinion, one that contradicts actual guidelines. Citing an say to set aside something as fundamental as WP:N is not a valid argument.  // Timothy :: talk  19:19, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
 * As pointed out by another editor, WP:NBUILD is an acutal guideline, and Badin Hall falls under it since it is listed as historic structure by the NRHP. Eccekevin (talk) 21:08, 17 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep Very good and interesting article, same as 20 similar ones dealing with University of Notre Dame residence halls. It's not a "personal opinion", as mentioned above. Note: I was NOT canvassed. -- Silve  rije  01:03, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Silverije, Looks like this is your first time at AfD, you picked an interesting time and place to start.  // Timothy :: talk  01:43, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
 * really? and how is this relevant to the afd? Coolabahapple (talk) 01:59, 17 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment, WP:NBUILD, that is not an essay or personal opinion, states "Artificial geographical features that are officially assigned the status of cultural heritage or national heritage, or of any other protected status on a national level and for which verifiable information beyond simple statistics is available, are presumed to be notable.", so if it is listed, and with the references present in the article (not necessarily having to be WP:SIGCOV), it is wikinotable and this afd is a waste of time. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:59, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Agreed, and no one voting delete has yet given a reason for which NBUILD does not apply. Eccekevin (talk) 22:37, 24 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep passes GNG as notable historic building w/ refs Djflem (talk) 18:58, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. Well-sourced article on an historic building. I can't see any useful reason for deletion. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:46, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep notable, historic building. Rjensen (talk) 23:57, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 13:50, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisted after a "redirect" closure per Deletion review/Log/2021 April 8.
 * Keep. And I did not see any canvassing, I just periodically visit Category:AfD debates (Places and transportation). --Doncram (talk) 04:41, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. Passes WP:SIGCOV.4meter4 (talk) 00:57, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. passes GNG Rajuiu (talk) 00:09, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   20:22, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Redirect to University of Notre Dame residence halls. Not an especially notable crusty building KidAd  •  SPEAK  20:48, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep passes GNG as notable historic building and has a unique history in multiple roles. Rjensen (talk) 21:07, 24 April 2021 (UTC)  Strike duplicate !vote.  Onel 5969  TT me 21:20, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per the cogent reasoning of DGG at the DRV this misses GNG. --Randykitty (talk) 22:02, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment The issue with that reasoning is that Badin Hall is explicitly listed as historic structure by the NHRP, it is not just geographically part of a district, as the example DGG made (of a house in a district, but not explicitly mentioned by the NRHP). Hence, there is a substantial difference and in this case and WP:NBUILD applies, since this structure has I have not seen any reasoning by which NBUILD does not apply here.
 * In addition, the reasoning that local news sources like the South Bend Tribune (which has two features profiles of Badin hall ) should be discounted is not found in any Wikipedia policy, but is arbitrary. It is independent, reliable, and the fact that is is based in a town close to where Badin Hall is doesn't take away from neither of those things. Eccekevin (talk) 22:29, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Indiana-related deletion discussions. Eccekevin (talk) 22:03, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Eccekevin (talk) 22:03, 24 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep While I do not feel that every place within a NRHP historic district, I'm satisfied that in this case there are enough sources for GNG. MB 22:36, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Redirect, to University of Notre Dame residence halls Alex-h (talk) 11:18, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Meet general notability guidelines and is a historic building in a historic district. Star7924 (talk) 14:51, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. EpicPupper (talk) 03:15, 2 May 2021 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.