Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Black Point (estate)


 * 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 of the debate was Keep Eluchil404 00:29, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Black Point (estate)
Non-notable subject, just being an old house isn't enough EdJones 01:24, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. As of 2007, the house will be a Wisconsin historic site open to the public (notability which the article asserts). I'm aware the main news link has expired, but it was recently in the NYT. A $1.6 million renovation is underway and a professional staff is being hired. There's also an odd little sidebar in a connection to the bribery conviction of former State Senate Majority Leader Chuck Chvala, who doesn't have an article as yet. (Isn't being on the National Register of Historic Places notable as is? cf. list) --Dhartung | Talk 02:26, 5 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Note: This AfD nomination was incomplete, listing now. —  The KMan  talk 04:58, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: Oh, so that's what happened. I was just about to ask an administrator. --Dhartung | Talk 07:01, 14 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep Seems notable enough to me. It's historic.  -- Alphachimp   talk  05:16, 14 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep - per Dhartung.  ''Em-jay-es  06:41, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, notability asserted and per Dhartung. --Coredesat 07:43, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per Dhartung. --Terence Ong (talk 09:16, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per dhartung B.ellis 15:09, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak keep per above, if expanded. -- Xyra  e  l  T 17:13, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per Dhartung. Golfcam 17:31, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep as being listed on the National Register of Historic Places is reason enough for this "old house." Sulfur 23:22, 14 June 2006 (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.