Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Centura Tower


 * 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. No prejudice against recreation as a redirect to List of tallest buildings in Tijuana, will supply copy of deleted material if requested for a merge. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:36, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Centura Tower

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Does not seem to pass WP:GNG. FuFoFuEd (talk) 04:17, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mexico-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 08:43, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 15:01, 11 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - fails to establish notability. Monterey Bay (talk) 00:18, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - There are no defined guidelines for the notability of buildings. This building is also notable in that it hosts the honorary consulate of Norway in Tijuana, and for being one of the tallest buildings in the city. As a young article, it should be kept per WP:ATD, as it can surely be improved. 08OceanBeach S.D.  23:22, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
 * What's wrong with WP:GNG here? And I certanly don't think that every building housing some consulate (not even an embassy) is automatically notable. The consulate of Norway in Tijuana has no Wikipedia page of its own, and probably for a good reason. You're essentially asserting that a non-wikinotable entity makes something else wikinotable, which is so outlandish it's not even mentioned at WP:NOTINHERITED. (Are we going to have an article for every embassy house on Massachusetts Avenue (Washington, D.C.)?) FuFoFuEd (talk) 08:42, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I see a few issues with the WP:GNG in the case of buildings. The primary topic is the issue of significant coverage; buildings do not generally make the headlines of newspaper articles and certainly not the focus of society after initial completion. However, the building does meet the criterion in the case of Reliability, Sourcing, and Independence of the subject. The article adequately supplies reliable sources, some of which are secondary and upon review one would find that there is not blatant advertising. My overall point is that in Tijuana, and even Baja California, it is notable for its height and the companies it headquarters. 08OceanBeach S.D.  10:00, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * There are plenty of books about architecture and even about the more mundane aspects of building engineering. Reliable sources are not limited to web pages and newspapers. FuFoFuEd (talk) 00:04, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, your statement is hardly relevant to, nor addresses, any of my above points. If it so pleases the reader, there are books mention the building regarding buildings and their structure in Mexico, in addition to some about buildings in Tijuana, located at the following links:, , , , and . 08OceanBeach S.D.  21:32, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 18 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Merge with List of tallest buildings in Tijuana because I do not think it is notable enough to meet WP:GNG.  Nipson anomhmata   (Talk) 10:35, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep The building appears notable enough, IMHO, especially for Tijuana. --Aude (talk) 23:47, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Special pleading? FuFoFuEd (talk) 00:02, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Not at all. If every building needed to be as notable as the Empire State Building or the Burj Khalifa than there would hardly be any building articles on Wikipedia. This buildling is extremely notable in Tijuana. 08OceanBeach S.D.  21:19, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. I can't find any coverage surrounding the building, and the only things of note would be the honorary consulates of Norway and Japan, but it is still not enough in my opinion to establish notability. On a side note, the article is called Centura Tower, but on nearly every hit I got it was being referred to as Centura Corporate Center, and it seems there is also a Centura Tower in Dallas — frankie (talk) 15:53, 19 August 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.