Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leicestershire County Council County Hall

Leicestershire County Council County Hall was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was to be merge and redirect the article to Leicestershire.

Leicestershire County Council County Hall
One building somewhere in Leicester. No reason given as to why it's important other than it being a seat of local government better mentioned on the county page if anything can be said about it, which it can't. Many government buildings have interesting design aspects, or a deep history. This just seems like any other county hall in any other county. Back where I used to live, the county hall looked like a series of mint humbugs. This one just looks like the generic tower block in which I work. Probably falls just short of the mark for speedy. Chris 01:38, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * keep Having started this page I don't really want to see it go. I thought that imposing buildings would be valid article entries. The architecture may look 70's and nasty, but I believe it is a listed building. The architect envisaged that buildings of the future would not want to be square. So the county hall was built with ‘bendy’ faces that aren’t necessarily visible on the photograph. Being the first building of its kind to break away from the 60’s office block design, it is considered an architectural breakthrough. I thinks its as ugly as sin though and would prefer it to be left to be improved rather than deleted out of human knowledge.Soloist 10:18, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect with Leicestershire. Yes it's an imposable building, yes it is one of the ugliest buildings on the planet (I should know, I used to live in Leicester) but there's nothing there that deserves it's own article.  All counties have their own county hall and unless this one stands out as being any different, which it doesn't, it should go. -- Graham  &#9786; | Talk 12:46, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
 * Merge and redirect with Leicestershire. Can I change my vote? When it comes down to it. Theres no real new information on this page. So maybe the pictures could be stuck over onto the leicestershire page. Soloist 22:51, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect with Leicestershire. zoney &#09827; talk 23:25, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * I question the decision to create a new section in the Leicestershire page with merely the text "Built around 1974". Chris 04:18, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not notable. Ooh look, I found a cool building! Let's write an article on Wikipedia! Maybe I'll find another tomorrow! --Improv 15:21, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect with Leicestershire - Skysmith 09:58, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect with 60's architecture Come on guys, Just because you have no interest in the subject does not make it invalid. Interesting as it may not be, there is no wikipedia article on 60’s architecture. It could be redirected there. Deleting things created in good faith is not the wiki way. The article needs more details before it could stand up on its own. Once there were few articles and the level of detail increased. One day the level of detail will be high enough to warrant articles on government buildings of England.Spike2004 11:22, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Being a listed building is certainly enough to warent an article. Mark Richards 23:59, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. (If you can't find anything to say about it, is it notable enough for its own entry?) Timberline 23:21, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Intrigue 04:12, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)