Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert Pringle 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 speedy keep. Nominating within 4 minutes of creation is beyond fucking stupid, Nominator deserves a trout!, As per below closing as Keep (non-admin closure) – Davey 2010 Talk 22:52, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Robert Pringle House

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article does not assert significance. Ethanlu121 (talk) 19:19, 8 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. The article is linked to from a list of the oldest buildings in South Carolina which had long had a hyperlink without any article. More importantly, tagging something that was created literally FOUR MINUTES earlier for deletion is silly. Articles need a little time to breathe.--ProfReader (talk) 20:02, 8 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. Lack of assertion of significance is by some quirk basis for a speedy delete, but it is not a requirement of articles.  Instead we use notability defined by reliable sources, present here.  And it's subjective whether there is assertion of significance or not.  You can say "The White House is a building in Washington, D.C." without having to explicitly document "Professor Z says the White House is architecturally very very important, and it is also very very important because lots of super-important events happened there."  This one exudes significance to me.  Also the article could say more about the dependencies, but it does say it has them and that they are award-winning.  That's a second assertion of notability for the property. -- do  ncr  am  17:51, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of South Carolina-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:33, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:33, 11 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep - Being an almost two and a half century old South Carolina house asserts significance. Coverage indicated in article demonstrates passing WP:GNG too. Ethanlu121, why was this nominated for AfD within four minutes of its creation? --Oakshade (talk) 02:07, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep Per all the above.VictoriaGraysonTalk 20:24, 14 April 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.