Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elliott Building


 * 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 Lower Woodward Avenue Historic District. Being a contributing building, I think it's worth mentioning about this building in a paragraph in the target article, especially given the current state of the target article. Regards (non-admin closure) — UY Scuti Talk  13:28, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Elliott Building

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unremarkable subject. Ethanlu121 (talk) 00:53, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:30, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:30, 20 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete unreferenced article about an unremarkable building. I can't find anything relating to it which suggests notability. The article is mainly a list of the various tenants of the building over the years, the sort of thing which could be written about countless buildings around the world. Neiltonks (talk) 13:00, 20 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Merge, leaving a redirect behind. It's promotional, but there is valid info in the article. The building is listed on the National Register of Historic Places as a contributing building in the Lower Woodward Avenue Historic District, and we could allow an article for it, as there are many other articles in wikipedia about individual contributing buildings in historic districts.  An URL for a source in the article is no longer valid, and the NRHP nomination document seems not to be available on-line (but can be obtained from the National Register by request, or from elsewhere).  But I found "Lower Woodward Avenue Historic District / Final Report" which seems to be the basis for the NRHP nomination, and I would expect that it is entirely included in the NRHP nomination.  It is PDF file "Lower+Woodward+Avenue+HD+Final+Report.pdf" at  (hope that works).  The building is at 1401 Woodward.
 * I think we don't need a separate article about this building, because it can be covered in a paragraph or section in the historic district article. Many historic district articles have sections on each of their significant contributing resources.  In the future it can possibly be restored as a separate article if more sourced info becomes available. -- do  ncr  am  20:05, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Merge to Lower Woodward Avenue Historic District, a functional WP:ATD that will improve the merge target article. North America1000 05:45, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Yellow Dingo &#160; (talk)  08:56, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Merge to Lower Woodward Avenue Historic District as per DonCram. There probably is enough on this building for an independent article some day (full disclosure: I'm a fan of the neighborhood and loving the revival that is going on there.)E.M.Gregory (talk) 16:47, 28 July 2016 (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.