Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Krasheninnikovy residential house


 * 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 keep. Liz Read! Talk! 23:55, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Krasheninnikovy residential house
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

The article has very few sources to establish notability (WP:NBUILDING) so I looked it up in English. There are very few results besides the Wikipedia page. I also checked the Russian Wikipedia page but it seems the English article is just a translation of the Russian article. A Russian google search also gives very few actual sources- livejournal and random newspages. Jaguarnik (talk) 23:27, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2022 December 2.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 23:47, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture and Russia.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 23:48, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep as a heritage listed building per WP:GEOFEAT. Official listing is here. Artificial geographical features that are officially assigned the status of cultural heritage or national heritage, or of any other protected status on a national level and for which verifiable information beyond simple statistics is available, are presumed to be notable. Clearly meets that criterion. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:05, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per Necrothesp. This source goes into some detail. 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 22:02, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. Even though it is not a national-wide but a regional historic heritage site, I'd keep the page. --Suitskvarts (talk) 11:50, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
 * It's classified as "of regional importance", but it's still listed on the national government heritage list so entirely meets WP:GEOFEAT. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:15, 9 December 2022 (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.