Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Palm Towers (2nd nomination)


 * 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 List of tallest buildings in Doha, Qatar. Eddie891 Talk Work 19:38, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Palm Towers
AfDs for this article:


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

Fails WP:GNG. Previous AfD resulted in soft deletion, and then the page creator recreated the page without improvement. Jfire (talk) 16:32, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Qatar-related deletion discussions. Jfire (talk) 16:32, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:27, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Add to the nomination: merge List of tallest skyscrapers in Qatar (which has no inbound links) with List of tallest buildings in Doha, Qatar as previously discussed. --Doncram (talk,contribs) 00:13, 17 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete - I find this kind of behaviour frustrating to say the least. Thanks to Jfire for tagging this and some of their other articles for AfD. Kazamzam (talk) 17:00, 15 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Redirect to List of tallest buildings in Doha, Qatar. Or "merge" some small amount of info.  Note The 2 Palm Towers are #6 and #7 tallest in Qatar.  For these and other tall building AFDs, enforce redirecting and merging to existing list-articles.  "Delete" decisions are almost always inappropriate IMHO, as it would be here, because wp:ATD is obvious, available. --Doncram (talk,contribs) 00:13, 17 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Note in recent Articles for deletion/JW Marriott Tower Hotel, it was noted that List of tallest skyscrapers in Qatar and List of tallest buildings in Doha, Qatar both exist, and overlap, and should be merged. Make that decision part of closure of this AFD. --Doncram (talk,contribs) 00:13, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 17:32, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
 * IMHO "Delete" judgement on separate building AFDs may seem attractive so that AFD editors/closer can act emphatic/harsh, but may contribute to frustration on the part of the outsider editors who create and re-create these. Let them see their material in edit history of the redirect.  As part of closing AFDs on tall buildings, advice the creators that some more detail, with sourcing, can be included in the row(s) of the table in list-article.  Channel their energy rather than inflaming.  Obviously past practices have not cut off the churn, so how about try to help these editors make a small impact in the list-articles, instead?  Or would that be appeasement, and Wikipedia should be punitive instead? --Doncram (talk,contribs) 00:13, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Relisting comment: This AfD closed as "delete". However this has been challenged by someone concerned that those advocating deletion did not appear to view an opinion on a redirect. I am therefore relisting this for a week Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  18:26, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete Not seeing this meeting GNG with wider coverage. LibStar (talk) 12:54, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete No indication of being notable or worthy of a being redirected.   scope_creep Talk  13:01, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete as there's no notability indicated in any way, shape or form, be it through WP:GNG or WP:SGN. Rkieferbaum (talk) 18:23, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * I'm ok with the redirect. Not really seeing notability anyway. Oaktree b (talk) 19:58, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm fine with redirect as suggested. Rkieferbaum (talk) 22:02, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm ok with, in fact prefer, redirect. I disagree with some pre-relisting comments such as one suggesting this is "not worthy" of being redirected.  Of course it is fine to have a redirect to the appropriate row in the list-article of tall buildings, especially because readers will arrive looking for an article on this topic.  IMHO this stuff matters, including for sake of preventing re-creations of the same articles, because outsider-type editors can't see a redirect, or any edit history, and they will just create it again and again.  It's true they might start to try replacing a redirect with a new stub article, at first, but these height-challenged types should find their way to (or can be directed to) the Talk page which will mention this AFD and its decision (not to have a separate article, but rather to redirect to the list-article row). --Doncram (talk,contribs) 23:19, 14 March 2023 (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.