Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prince George’s Park Residences (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 of the debate was delete. --Ezeu 22:42, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Prince George’s Park Residences
Article does not assert the notability of this building. It may be the largest student residence in NUS, but surely there are larger student residences in universities elsewhere. Delete.

(Note that the article was previously deleted after its first AfD, but this re-creation is almost certainly different from the first. It's still not notable IMO.) Kimchi.sg 12:54, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as NN per WP:SBW (So Bloody What?). Seriously, who cares?  It's a dorm building.  Colleges tend to have them.  They're not quite as non-notable as the sidewalks outside, but pretty durned close.  (Plainly I need more tea this morning.)  RGTraynor 14:39, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as per RGTraynor. (is SBW policy?  if not, maybe it should be.) -- stubblyh ea d | T/c 16:18, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment; nah, I made it up on the spot, and the essay I'd write on it wouldn't likely be fluffy enough for the WP:CIVIL-hawks. Even so, AfD would have a lot less business if more editors made a NPOV judgment as to the likelihood anyone would care about a particular subject.  RGTraynor 16:25, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: You're looking for WP:WTH. Stifle (talk) 15:29, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. According to Wikipedia precedence, we keep dorm buildings if some girl got caught on photo performing a striptease there. In the absence of any releant evidence of that I was about to vote delete. Personally, I'd be willing to keep a dorm if it had an interesting history or some architecture of note, but this one seems to fail on those grounds as well. However, with 3,000 rooms in 30 blocks, this is pretty large - a whole neighbourhood rather than a single building. It would have been kept if it had been a village. And I also think I have seen much less notable American dorms around here, so it gets a few additional keep-points to counter systemic bias. u p p l a n d 21:07, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. The existence or nonexistence of air conditioning and private bathrooms in a college dormitory is not encyclopedic material. To counter systemic bias, we ought to delete American dorms rather than keep foreign dorms. --Metropolitan90 00:57, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is not because I am the one creating this article. PGPR is the largest student residence in NUS, occupying a significant percentage of the total area of 2km2 of NUS. It can be considered to be a university village, as students can find most of the things they need in PGPR. Furthermore, the wikipedia article on NUS has links to this article, as well as to articles on other NUS' student residences, which are definitely not as large as PGPR. Some of these articles, such as Eusoff Hall or Raffles Hall, have been alive for months. There is apparently no reason why this article should be deleted. Mdanh2002 06:01, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: Thanks for raising your objections, but we don't decide whether an article should stay just because other similarly non-notable buildings have articles as well. To spare the AfD crowd the pain of having to vote on these also, I'll merge and redir the others into the main National University of Singapore article (which is surprisingly lightweight). Kimchi.sg 17:59, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:BAI. Stifle (talk) 15:29, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. If there is something of importance merge it into National University of Singapore.  Vegaswikian 18:52, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge into National University of Singapore, while removing absolutely non-notable information, like rooms size and furniture, room categories, and the like. LjL 20:30, 17 May 2006 (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.