Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Regalia (Condominium)


 * 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.  Sandstein  07:42, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Regalia (Condominium)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article about a condominium project with no discernible indication of notability under our inclusion standards for buildings. Although not blatant enough in tone to merit speedy, the intent here was clearly to advertise it rather than to write an encyclopedia article about it -- after asserting that the building exists, the entire rest of the article is a description of the base unit which sounds like an HGTV host trying to talk that unit's selling features up to me, and the only "source" is a press release from the building's owner about the selection of the architect (a self-published primary source that cannot support notability in a Wikipedia article.) As always, Wikipedia is not a free public relations platform on which every condo building is entitled to an article just because it exists -- it's an encyclopedia, in which a condo building has to be reliably sourced as notable for something more than just existing. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 18:39, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions.  Vipinhari  &#124;&#124;  talk  18:45, 3 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete no third-party sources indicating notability, further fails WP:LOCAL.-- danntm T C 01:57, 7 March 2016 (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.