Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Hardwick Arms Hotel


 * 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. There does, however, appear to be some dispute on where the bar lies on historic buildings (apart from GNG). Black Kite (talk) 09:07, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

The Hardwick Arms Hotel

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No notability at all. There must be many hundreds of pubs in Britain equally as notable (or rather lacking notability). Meets no criteria for notability.  Velella  Velella Talk 19:18, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete per the article. WP:MILL bar.  Old, but not old enough to be interesting or notable. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  19:22, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. — Mike  moral  ♪♫  19:26, 3 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep Grade II listing is not insignificant. Barney the barney barney (talk) 20:44, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete on the present evidence. A Grade II listing certainly contributes to notability, but is not sufficient in itself. There is little in the listing description to lift it above the routine. My house is also Grade II; I would not think it merited an article, though my street does and mine is probably the most significant of the listed buildings in it. Obviously, transplant this building elsewhere in the world and it might be of outstanding interest and have great notability in consequence, but as Andrew Lenahan points out this is Britain and it is one of many. --AJHingston (talk) 23:48, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:46, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:46, 4 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I agree with the above editors that grade II listing and dating from the early nineteenth century are nothing to write home about. Grade II* would be needed for significance based on listing, and, for a British pub, 200 years is nothing more than early middle age - I would say that for a pub to be notably old it would have to be at least twice that age. Some coverage can be found by using slightly more focused searches: . Such seaching confirms the hunting connection, that, like most pubs, this is occasionally used as a meeting place and that the pub sponsors a couple of horse races at the nearby racecourse. More interesting bits of information that I can see are that two very notable people have been barred from the pub and this amusing anecdote about a guest, the landlady, a cat and a broom. I'm not sure that I can see anything amounting to notability here. Phil Bridger (talk) 12:13, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I do not think this is likely to be notable enough. It is only grade II not grade II*, and there are tens of thousands of grade II buildings.  How about merge to Sedgefield, which has a rather dull article.  Peterkingiron (talk) 19:46, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L Faraone  02:03, 11 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete Grade II isn't enough, there is nothing particularly notable about this building or it history beyond what makes a good half million buildings (about 2% of the building stock) listed. Wiki has list of Grade II buildings (such as Grade II listed buildings in Brighton and Hove: A–B and those lists are far from complete. A place on a list should be sufficient. Jason from nyc (talk) 15:03, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - the only source is the listed buildings entry, which contains significant coverage of the type needed to meet notability guidelines, but is not enough alone - an article needs more than one source. A search via Google only finds a small number of trivial mentions. Peter&#160;James (talk) 17:15, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep I'm not sure how many other establishments there are that can say they barred a serving Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and a serving president of the United States. I also feel that in general a grade II listed public house has more notability than a grade II private home barring exceptions such as castles etc. Thanks Fraggle81 (talk) 16:26, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
 * There's no evidence that any prime minister or president even considered visiting this this establishment. The "bar" was obviously a publicity stunt on the occasion of Bush's visit to Blair in his Sedgefield constituency and only got a passing mention from an author. By selecting "monument type", "commercial" and "inn" from this English Heritage search page I find 14,675 pubs listed at grade II and above in England, which hardly makes it a selective enough honour for us to assume notability on its basis. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:00, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
 * A public house is likely to be more notable than a private home, but only because it's more likely to have been written about - that's what is required for WP:GNG- and in this case there's no evidence of that coverage. Peter&#160;James (talk) 20:15, 23 July 2013 (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.