Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mountain Lake 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. (NAC)--Antigng (talk) 08:54, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Mountain Lake House

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Notability not established, no references, WP:OR, external links are to tangential topics or forums/blogs. Vrac (talk) 23:58, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. Sources exist to verify the claim that this was a leading Poconos resort in its day.   The case would be stronger if there a non-local source could be identified. --Arxiloxos (talk) 01:11, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Weak keep also per article stating it was a premier resort in the Poconos —Мандичка YO 😜 11:32, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:17, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:17, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:17, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:44, 22 June 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JAaron95  &#40; Talk &#41;  13:55, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep. In addition to "keep" arguments above, it is significant that the resort was deemed eligible for protection under the "Pennsylvania Historical Museum Commission Bureau for Historic Preservation".  That probably means that there exists documentation of historic architectural, social or other importance.  I'm not very familiar with Pennsylvania's rules, but in other states the designation of eligibility is a high standard, and the only difference between historic-register-listed places vs. these ones is that the owner(s) feared listing would reduce their property value.  There's mention of archives of photos which probably have other documentation too.  So it's most reasonable to believe there exists plenty of coverage meeting wp:GNG, although probably not available online. -- do  ncr  am  03:42, 2 July 2015 (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.