Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SeaRise Office Tower


 * 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. North America1000 01:00, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

SeaRise Office Tower

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable office building, one of a whole pile of such by the same editor. See Articles for deletion/501 7th Avenue for example. DMacks (talk) 20:55, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 15:50, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 15:50, 3 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment, quite a nicely constructed article, although the missing "history" from the building's 1976 construction to 2007 and then another gap until 2016 is a bit of a worry, but how is it notable to warrant an article, ie. any architecture/construction awards? is it historically significant? at the moment it exists and thats about it. Coolabahapple (talk) 15:56, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment  says that the price paid per square foot was a record at the time.  I'm not yet sure about the size, it mentions 128,000 sq ft, but is that the sq ft per floor?  From the pictures, there appear to be about seven floors.  But...there is a company listed on the NYSE that is documented here, and we don't have an article on that company.  Unscintillating (talk) 19:35, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete -- an advertorially toned page on an unremarkable office building, including the lead sentence that advertises it as:
 * "...a premier Class A office building ..."
 * The rest of the content is routine corporate developments, no encyclopedic value here. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:43, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep I'm thinking it might pass GEOFEAT, can I have 16 hours to look into this and tidy up the article? ThanksL3X1 (distænt write)  03:42, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 07:57, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete No reason this is notable, a mundane office building. No significant coverage in third-party reliable sources to satisfy "historic, social, economic, or architectural importance" criterea of WP:GEOFEAT.--Pontificalibus (talk) 09:07, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Per others, my searches did not find enough material. L3X1 (distænt write)  14:26, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Doesn't meet NG at all. (+Wikipedia is not a places directory) -- QEDK ( 愛  •  海 ) 17:55, 17 October 2017 (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.