Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pencubitt 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   delete. Irrespective of the copyright issue, consensus is that this lacks notability. JohnCD (talk) 16:06, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Pencubitt House

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

The article was restored after the proposed deletion was contested at requests for undeletion, but the subject seems to lack evidence of notability, and there seems to have been some copyright issues with the content. Regards,   A rbitrarily 0    ( talk ) 12:29, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions.  --    A rbitrarily 0    ( talk ) 12:31, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Request Please judge this one on its merits. Arbitrarily0 is quite right about copyright concerns; the material was licensed under GFDL on the very day of licensing transition, and the article may have to be deleted regardless of outcome here. But copyright concerns can be eradicated easily by the external site's content being re-licensed appropriately. It would be helpful to know if consensus is that the article should not be retained even if that should happen. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:48, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Yes, I think we should completely ignore the copyright issue. It is clear that the copyright owner is happy for us to use the material, and the licensing technicalities can easily be cleared up if we choose to keep the article. JamesBWatson (talk) 16:26, 12 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:28, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak keep if the copy-vio issue can be resolved. The building is architecturally interesting, but the "history" is evidnetly promotional material for the present hotel.  Since its website is the only source, a WP:RS issue must also arise, but that is probably better dealt with by tagging it for sources.  Peterkingiron (talk) 17:35, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete I don't see that the building is "architecturally interesting": it seems quite ordinary to me. However, whether it is interesting or not, there is no evidence that it has any substantial coverage in independent sources. Not notable. JamesBWatson (talk) 18:00, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Unable to see/find any info that allows this to meet requirements, non notable. Paste Let’s have a chat. 10:10, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Where is the coverage in secondary sources? Why would there be coverage? I didn't find anything in the Cornish Guardian out of Newquay. In the Cornish Times out of Liskeard, I found no articles for 1998, one article 13 August 1999 with a brief mention about astrologer Russell Grant staying at the hotel. Nothing about the hotel. In 2000 there were three articles, two about club meeting being held at the hotel, and one mention of a book, in full: A book just published by an elderly lady in Sheffield decribes her happy days serving in the Land Army at Pencubitt, Liskeard. Primarily an account of the author’s childhood and growing up in Pitsmoor, Sheffield, ‘Lessons my Father taught me’ by Dorothy Platt contains photos and anecdotes about her time as a Land Army girl and the friends she made at Pencubitt. In 2001 one article mentioned that an anniversary dinner was held at the hotel.  There were no articles 2002-2010. --Bejnar (talk) 02:07, 17 February 2010 (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.