Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hicks 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 no consensus. IronGargoyle 05:00, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Hicks Building

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Contested prod. Non-notable building. Adambro 14:05, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. It's beautifully written, and if it can be cited that it's one of the tallest buildings in the city, I might change my mind. Yechiel Man 14:13, 30 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment I am not yet convinced that this is a notable building. However it would make a good section of an article Buildings of the University of Sheffield (yet to be created); some of its buildings are individually notable (eg the Arts Tower, which is listed) and others less obviously so (eg there is the Psychology Building, built in brutalist concrete mode). -- roundhouse 14:46, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge into said article above or article about the university. I've managed to tackle the other unreferenced point regarding the re-cladding, but as for it being one of the taller buildings in the city, it doesn't seem to be listed here or on Sheffield city council's website, so technically there is no assertion of notability. - Zeibura S. Kathau (Info 17:15, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Smerge to University of Sheffield per Zeibura. Not a notable building. --Dhartung | Talk 10:04, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Building is of great importance in Sheffield, and within the University of Sheffield.  This is to form a series on Buildings and structures in Sheffield and the afore-mentioned list of Buildings of the University of Sheffield.  See also SheffieldStructures, which will be transcluded onto some of these articles.   L.J.Skinner wot 09:49, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Whilst I'm sure the building is of great importance, the article does not seem to satisfy Notability. Adambro 12:31, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Article establishes notablitiy to my satisfaction. Dsmdgold 17:20, 3 June 2007 (UTC) Article establishes sufficient notability to satisfy my understanding of the criteria at Notability. Dsmdgold 20:39, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment The question is more whether the article establishes notability to satisfy the criteria at Notability, something I don't believe it does. Adambro 12:31, 6 June 2007 (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.