Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Japanese Room (The University of Melbourne)


 * 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.  Sandstein  10:36, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

The Japanese Room (The University of Melbourne)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

non notable reproduction, seems promotional for the school and the architect  DGG ( talk ) 04:20, 6 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete as previous PROD nominator. Timothy Joseph Wood  12:07, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:05, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:05, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:05, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:14, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 04:05, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Only because of lack of sources. The room itself seems to be important enough for an article here.Borock (talk) 05:14, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep It exists, has some history, and was significant enough to be recreated in the new Melbourne School of Design bulding. And there are plenty of sources to be found that mention it, here are some:, , . "promotional for the school and the architect" - you could say the same for any example of architecture or interior design ever created! Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 12:30, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Weak delete - two sources, neither independent. Fails GNG and makes a fairly poor effort at asserting notability ("The Japanese Room is historically significant as it was built during 1963." - what?) yet it does seem plausible that sources could exist. Perhaps the article creator could help with that? --Yeti Hunter (talk) 08:22, 19 September 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.