Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Puthia Raj bari


 * 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:13, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Puthia Raj bari

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

There are no citations or references that will show wp:notability Jguard18 Critique Me  13:45, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:58, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:58, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

help! what shall i do next? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.234.203.175 (talk) 18:06, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep Did the nominator follow WP:BEFORE? Google Books provides snippet views such as "a particularly striking example of the confrontation of palace and temple" and full view such as this; main Google search provides pieces such as "one of the finest old Rajbari (King's palace) of Bangladesh" . Improve, not delete. AllyD (talk) 19:47, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - Meets WP:N, although not by a great margin, at least based upon sources available online. Source examples include:, , . Perhaps additional offline sources are available. Northamerica1000(talk) 01:15, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep: Of course it's notable. It's an historic and rather attractive building built for an historic figure. It's also an interesting fusion of intercontinental architecture with strong Palladian influences. There are plenty of references if someone cares to look for them. Perhaps the nominator would be better off spending his time doing so, rather than making time wasting nominations such as this.  Giano   08:37, 29 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep per everyone else. There are multiple articles in the Bangladesh Daily Star which can be used to expand and reference the information currently in the article. See also this in Banglapedia which has a fairly extensive description of the architecture and calls it "is the most notable structure in the area". After this AfD ends, the article should be moved to Puthia Rajbari, the way the name is normally rendered in the sources. Voceditenore (talk) 09:34, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - per all above (except nom). Barring BLP issues, WP:N only requires the existence of sources, not that they be placed in the article.  Improvement of an article of a notable topic is always welcome, not deletion.--Oakshade (talk) 04:22, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep Eminently notable building with a notable history and interesting architectural attributes. I also agree with all the well-considered "Keep" rationales just above. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις  05:48, 30 October 2013 (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.