Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simon Bradstreet 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 keep. Kurykh (talk) 23:57, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Simon Bradstreet House

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article doesn't indicate GNG and a Google News search reaffirms that.  J 947  03:41, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 12:22, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 12:22, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 12:22, 6 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment - It is also given passing mention on page 89 of this book, but I don't find much beyond that. Smmurphy(Talk) 18:45, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
 * A couple more nearly identical references can be found searching, "pearl and mechanic" marblehead. Still, I can't really bring myself to !vote either way. Smmurphy(Talk) 18:47, 6 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Weak delete, but I'd be happy to reconsider if anyone can show this is a registered monument/landmark. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 01:38, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. It is listed on the U.S. National Register of Historic Places ( RHP), not separately but as a contributing building in Marblehead Historic District.  Unfortunately the NRHP registration document is not available online for MHD (at least not at normal expected location in the National Park Service's "Focus" system), but the document would be available by request to the National Park Service.  It is quite reasonable to expect some detailed information about the Simon Bradstreet House to be included in the document.  Based on the current article's info including its photo, it looks to me like this house would be individually notable for listing on the NRHP for its architecture and historic character if it were not included in the historic district.  There is also a local "Old and Historic Districts Commission" which would list it and have documents about it.  A 2015 news article about the district is here which describes the character of the district and how oddly houses are placed (houses built before roads were, and odd placement of Simon Bradstreet house is suggested by the photo in the article).  There will also be offline documents/information available at local history museum Marblehead Museum (www.marbleheadmuseum.org) and/or public library, if someone would make a trip to Marblehead or contact local librarians/historians there.
 * I have seen Marblehead from the air, and I know Marblehead is a beautiful, well-preserved very historic New England town, and in my opinion it is a cut above other historic districts listed on the NRHP elsewhere. -- do ncr  am  17:22, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Further: Besides for its architecture and age, the house will be notable for its association with the preacher Simon Bradstreet, an exceptional person.  See this biographical sketch which covers his money woes and his receiving the minister gig in Marblehead and a 140 pound grant which he used to build this house.  These facts are already covered in article briefly, by use of offline sources which may be extensive, it is hard to say without seeing them.  For U.S. NRHP places, the combination of quite old age (for the U.S.) plus architecture/preservation exemplifying the historic era plus known detailed association with a notable historic person adds up to high significance.  I'll stop here, without Googling further on the historic district or the house. -- do  ncr  am  17:34, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
 * P.S. User:J947, please don't make AFD nominations about historic places based on your lack of findings in a Google News search!  It would not be expected to be in current news. And for a place mentioned to be in a historic district, the historic district should be researched before AFD, too.  (So try also .) -- do  ncr  am  17:39, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Good catch, Doncram. The National Register of Historic Places nomination form for Marblehead can be found here if you click the "NR" button after "Inventory Number:". The Bradstreet house is mentioned in the application, and it is also called the "Bradstreet-Brown House". Smmurphy(Talk) 17:59, 10 March 2017 (UTC)


 * User:Smmurphy, thanks! The NRHP historic district document doesn't have a lot of detail on it, I think because this historic district is quite huge (>900 contributing buildings to list), but it does mention it saliently, naming it among 3 examples of "more substantial" Georgian period buildings having "five-bay, two-story structures which feature dormers, a pedimented entry, and a gambrel roof."   I added a bit of that to the article.
 * Note, no way should this have ever headed for outright deletion, because merger/redirect to the historic district would always have been a better option. But there was and is more detail about this house now than would be comfortably covered in the historic district article, so it would not make sense to merge it. -- do  ncr  am  18:38, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note that I just did a Google News search with all results (before 10 Mar), and still got no results (see here). I'm happy with a redirect to Marblehead Historic District. Out of the viewable Google Books results, none seem to indicate significant coverage.  J 947  19:45, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Hey, User:J947, thanks for responding to my ping, but my point is that "News" is not the right search to run. Google News only covers a few years of news, and does not cover the larger internet of all webpages and does not cover scholarly works.  This is a historic house that is not likely to have been in the news. -- do  ncr  am  20:00, 10 March 2017 (UTC)


 * at most weak keep -- This is merely one building in NRHP registered district (or is it a candidate?). Much of the article is not about the house but about Simon Bradstreet, a church minister, who does not seem very notable either.  If not kept, merge briefly to Marblehead Historic District.  Peterkingiron (talk) 18:16, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Redirect - While the historic district is significant, and this building is historical, the relevant information from this article (not the stuff about the minister, but the stuff about the building) should be added to Marblehead Historic District.  Onel 5969  TT me 17:18, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Everyone. This is as you may have guessed in my first net new page to wiki and the reasons that I think it was worth the time to add it is the follow. I stopped editing the page and adding content as it appeared it was going to be deleted and I wanted to benfit from your feedback and suggestions. The reason that I believe it is worthy of being added here are the following and if you agree I will complete my work over the next two days.

1. Chance Bradsteet an early slave was born here and sold to another party. The house were he lived is currently standing erect at the smithsonian and I have a copy of the the orgincal bill of sale from Isaac Story to Abraham Dodge.

2. The papers of Issac Story are being published by the cambridge libary and have two excellect condition letters. One by George Washonton and one by Thomas Jefferson that were sent to the house. In addition, within the Smithsonian as part of the Thomas Jefferson library there are serveral additional letters talking about jobs, freindship and life after death.

https://thecambridgeroom.wordpress.com/2016/08/23/isaac-story-papers-now-available/

3. I find it interesteresting that the guy that had his office burned down due to the passage of the stamp act died here and also had a Son that was a participant in the Boston Tea party. That must have made holidays somewhat awkward.

4. The age, condition and the fact the home is almost idendentical in the front as when it was built.

If you think it is worth me completing this work I would enjoy that, but I do not want my first page to be out of line with the guildlines.

Thank you for your consideration. --User:DSRitchie, 03:27, 15 March 2017 (UTC)


 * In my opinion, you can keep working on it. If the page is deleted, any material on the house itself is likely to be merged to the page on the historic district. Material on individuals is a bit different. If you think Simon Bradstreet is notable according to notability guidelines and would make a good page, I would recommend starting in draft space, user space, or using the article wizard to make a page on him, so that the page has some time to develop before being reviewed. The same is true if you are considering creating pages for other individuals. As for the arguments you make, those are interesting, but look to possibly be original research. Wikipedia has a policy against publishing original research, which you can read about here, and while primary sources may be allowed to help create a page, the issue of whether a subject is suitable for inclusion on wikipedia generally is based on the whether or not multiple secondary or tertiary sources discuss the subject in depth, not whether they are interesting. Smmurphy(Talk) 14:45, 15 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep. I was wavering between weak keep/neutral/delete - but article creator has mentioned in this discussion not only the house but also Chance Bradstreet and Simon Bradstreet (minister), neither of whom have articles but both of whom look damclose to passing WP:BIO on their own. IMO an article - even in progress - about this house and two of its residents passes WP:GNG. I learned something interesting today (from a WP:AFD, natch!), which is what Wiki is all about. This isn't a case of WP:OTHERSTUFF, the other stuff has been found and this article is on its way to being a damgud one. Narky Blert (talk) 01:22, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
 * PS Some of the editors who have posted in this thread might perhaps reread WP:NEWBIES. Narky Blert (talk) 01:37, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 06:35, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep The additional references since this was originally nominated help satisfy GNG. I considered the argument to merge to Marblehead Historic District but the additional information about some of the historically interesting inhabitants of the house would be too much information for just one house at that target and I see no encylopedic purpose that would be served by deleting this information. 24.151.10.165 (talk) 16:03, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep The sources added put the article as meeting the notability standard. Alansohn (talk) 21:57, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep sources support notability.E.M.Gregory (talk) 19:58, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep I agree, at this point the case is much stronger. Smmurphy(Talk) 21:33, 24 March 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.