Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/St. Paul's Episcopal Church (Cleveland Heights, Ohio)


 * 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. No arguments for deletion aside from Edison. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:46, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

St. Paul's Episcopal Church (Cleveland Heights, Ohio)

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Appears to be an average church with no demonstration of notability. Claims of being the largest church in the diocese, even if supported, aren't enough for notability. Nyttend (talk) 14:40, 8 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Oppose deletion Although the article hasn't been adequately developed to properly include assertion of notability, I think it may be notable.  Also i find it a bit odd that the church's own website doesn't show many pics of the church, or describe the building history at al, but I guess that is not their focus.  You can see a glimpse of the church building at top of one of its pages.   This site gives some history.  Okay, and now I find this Cleveland Heights landmarks website, which lists it as one of 40 designated landmarks of the city.  There's a downloadable PDF document about all the landmarks with a description of this one on page 12.  So it is notable as a historic site.  About the failings of the current article, wp:SOFIXIT. :) doncram (talk) 15:04, 8 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep; while a short and uninspiring story by Greek or Chinese standards, it is quite notable by U.S. measure, and has its place in books on the history of Cleveland. Quite generously and available on the web. Even its organ made it to An Encyclopedia of Organ and labelled "definitive" for its builder, FWIW. NVO (talk) 16:42, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * It might be a contributing property to Fairmount Boulevard District. It's located at 2747 Fairmount Blvd, which is within the district's locations between 2485 and 3121 Fairmount Blvd.  Walker and Weeks, the architect of the church, is listed as one of the architects of the district, so it seems likely that the church is a contributing property.  So, let's keep this.  --Elkman (Elkspeak) 17:17, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, being one of 40 official landmark buildings in a city the size of Cleveland Heights, population 49,000, isn't as impressive as I first thought. By comparison, the city of Chicago has 309 landmarks for its 2,853,000 people. Abductive  (reasoning) 17:35, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak delete It has existed since the 1850's, not all that long, and has had a nice building since the 1920s, with a nice pipe organ. Within its community, is is considered significant by some local board which determines landmarks. I see nothing which argues for more than a brief mention in the article about the community it is located in. I checked the last effort we made at a notability standard for congregations, the rejected Notability (local churches and other religious congregations), and nothing here would have satisfied that proposal, which represented the views of several editors interested in articles about religious congregations. Edison (talk) 18:20, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak keep and search for more details and more sourcing. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 20:22, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per Elkman's statements; I wasn't aware that this was likely a part of a National Register of Historic Places district, which means that we could simply turn this into the core of an article on the district. I would close this as "withdrawn by nominator", except for the delete vote above.  Nyttend (talk) 01:28, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Thryduulf (talk) 12:54, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions. Thryduulf (talk) 12:54, 14 September 2009 (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.