Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kit Houses of Ann Arbor, Michigan


 * 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   redirect to Kit houses in Michigan.  Sandstein  11:33, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Kit Houses of Ann Arbor, Michigan

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I appreciate the article creator's removal of a list of addresses of private homes (well, house numbers if not streets), but this is not a notable and encyclopedic topic. If it were, we would have better sources than the most local of local newspapers (see WP:LOCALFAME); the cited sources are papers distributed free to residents of Ann Arbor, they're not even the main local newspaper much less a historic source indicating scholarly interest. –Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 01:26, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Right here is my issue with this user's attempt to delete the article. The sourcing is based on articles published by two noted authorities on architecture and kit homes including numerous publications in national publications as well as being published authors themselves. The fact that one of the articles appeared in "the most local of local newspapers" takes nothing away from the quality of their work or the authority which they bring to these pieces. Furthermore, their work has been cited in numerous publications. Of course, the user apparently knows nothing of this and attacks the sourcing solely on where it was published.Kithousefans (talk) 01:36, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
 * The list of Lustron houses includes both owner names and addresses as do other articles about historic homes. This simply highlights the arbitrary nature of the request to delete this page or force the removal of addresses from this page.Kithousefans (talk) 01:38, 4 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete (see further commentary below) - per ongoing discussions at Articles for deletion/Kit Houses of Ypsilanti, Michigan. We need sourcing that demonstrates this is notable outside a small geographic area (and I'm not even convinced it's notable within that small geographic area). Stalwart 111  01:55, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Multiple sources by authorities on this subject are included in the article. Clusters of kit homes within a small geographic area is notable and is referenced in the main Sears Catalog Homes article. As I noted in the other article, these same arguments should be applied to the article on Luston homes and similar lists of homes and locations listed on Wikipedia.Kithousefans (talk) 02:05, 4 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete - sources are all local and not significant publications. Deathlibrarian (talk) 04:00, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Authors of the articles include a noted national authority on kit homes (Schweitzer) who's book on kit homes is frequently cited in academic works. The homes of Ann Arbor have also been referenced specifically by national experts on kit homes (Thornton).Kithousefans (talk) 10:59, 4 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete and Comment I don't think the coverage in reliable secondary sources rises to the level required of an encyclopedia. I do think that there might be some other local wiki that this might be more appropriate for. Nwlaw63 (talk) 13:09, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:00, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:00, 4 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Kit houses in Michigan with this draft as a base. There aren't enough sources, I think, to support articles about kit houses in individual towns. But the State of Michigan had a particularly notable role in the development of the kit house industry in the United stated during the 20s and 30s. I'd be keen to know if Deathlibrarian and Nwlaw63 would support that solution and I've started a conversation with the nominator on his talk page. Stalwart 111  04:37, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
 * This seems like a completely reasonable solution. Nwlaw63 (talk) 21:16, 5 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Stalwart111's far better solution. I think there's enough there to establish the general notability of the topic as a whole whereas there's not enough Kit houses of ______ articles. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 05:47, 11 October 2013 (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.