Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Loyola Hall (Seattle University)


 * 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 Campus of Seattle University or a similar article with the same scope. There's consensus here that a standalone article is inappropriate. It is likely that the same holds true for the other buildings discussed here, but absent a bundled nomination, this discussion is insufficient to constitute a consensus for those articles. Vanamonde (Talk) 18:04, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Loyola Hall (Seattle University)

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

Every university has dozens of buildings that house educational departments and their existence is not notability. Sourced only to the single non-independent source of the College of Education's webpage at seattleu.edu, it's unclear what makes this building notable or why it was created this way. Reywas92Talk 22:41, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education and Washington. Reywas92Talk 22:41, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete unless significant coverage of this building can be found in reliable sources that are entirely independent of Seattle University. Cullen328 (talk) 23:21, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment Sources added include the student newspaper, the Seattle University Magazine, and some very passing mentions. I would recommend a Campus of Seattle University page rather than stub articles on individual buildings that are minimally notable on their own. The same applies to Administration Building (Seattle University), Lemieux Library and McGoldrick Learning Commons, Jim and Janet Sinegal Center for Science and Innovation, Hunthausen Hall, etc. Reywas92Talk 00:20, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I would also endorse a Merge all to form new article unless individual notability can be demonstrated. Jclemens (talk) 04:25, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Guerilla bombing at height of 60s/70s protest movement? That's notable, but not in the article. Keep or Merge into something. There's too few articles for individual university buildings with artistic and/or historical significance.Prburley (talk)
 * The bombing actually targeted the ROTC building, but Loyola was close enough to be damaged. There's not much focus on Seattle_University in general; more content on this sort of history would be great, but doesn't need to be individual articles! Reywas92Talk 16:07, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 12:11, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 12:11, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   10:42, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Merge all to form new article unless individual notability can be demonstrated. The Banner  talk 09:12, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment: I don't think merging all would be appropriate. We should not just assume none of these buildings are notable, not to mention, none of the articles about these other buildings are tagged as part of this discussion. We should only be focusing on Loyola Hall at this time. I assume there are other sources which could be used to detail the building's construction, cost, etc, but perhaps not any/many published independent of Seattle University. I'm not against the creation of Campus of Seattle University, but keep in mind another option might be List of Seattle University buildings, per Category:Lists of university and college buildings in the United States. --- Another Believer  ( Talk ) 13:14, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Yet you've assumed they are automatically notable by creating them with one or few sources with limited subtantive coverage or independence. Even if some are notable, consolidation is a good WP:NOPAGE option. Either title is fine, though the latter mostly has tables and bullets while those with the former tend to also cover history and layout and non-building features with more prose. Reywas92Talk 17:52, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't think these pages should be deleted. Even if redirected to a campus article or buildings list, the pages would serve a purpose. Also, the article histories should be preserved. IMO, merge or notability discussions should occur on an individual basis, after a parent entry is created. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 18:55, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Relisting comment: Relisting and reminding participants that the only article up for debate is Loyola Hall (Seattle University).
 * Merge all is a good option. Hyperbolick (talk) 11:11, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Strong oppose. Comment does not even address secondary coverage and none of the other articles are tagged as part of this discussion. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 15:45, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment This AFD discussion is about Loyola Hall (Seattle University), only. The other articles mentioned above have not even been tagged for AFD discussion, page creators were never notified, this is not a bundled nomination. So, please focus your comments on Loyola Hall alone. Liz Read! Talk! 08:37, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Feel free at another time to make a bundled nomination including other related articles which have been tagged and their page creators notified of an AFD discussion. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 19:16, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Relisting comment: Final relist Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:30, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Merge to a university-level article about its buildings, or to a starter section in the main university article, or "Keep but rename to broader topic of all buildings of the university" is always, I dare say, the proper outcome of any AFD about a university dorm or academic building etc. (Or outright "Keep" if there are sources and article is too big to merge comfortably.) There are too many of these AFDs, they should be immediately halted and closed as a technical or administrative action, and the nominators should be cautioned and directed to overwhelming precedents on this (or to what AFD discussion page topic summarizing this?).  Nominators should never again get a notch on their belt for one of these.  What does it require to eliminate continuation of a whole stream of hundreds of AFDs going on and on and on and on? --Doncram (talk,contribs) 20:01, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
 * This has become a discussion about merging a bunch of entries to a non-existent page. Most folks here take no issue with the text of this specific article, so I don't see a point in deleting altogether at this time. I suggest we keep for now (disclaimer: page creator), if this is too much content to merge into Seattle University. Anyone able to search the archives of The Seattle Times for more possible coverage? --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 20:20, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Procedural close per WRONGFORUM. If this were a bundeled nomination we could reasonably merge all of these articles based on this discussion, but it isn't. No notifications have been placed on the other pages, and in effect we don't have the structures in place or authority to make a unilateral decision here that impacts all of these articles without properly notifying the community on those article pages. Given the majority interest in a merge, this discussion should be closed for procedural reasons, and then a proper merge discussion should take place at WP:MERGEPROP, the correct forum for this discussion, with notifications placed on all of the articles being targeted for merger.4meter4 (talk) 22:41, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Nonsense. Just because voters suggested a merge does not mean their votes here must be ignored and restated elsewhere. Merge is a perfectly acceptable AFD vote and outcome, even if the target does not yet exist. Reywas92Talk 17:33, 9 November 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.