Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Parkway Theater (Baltimore, MD)


 * 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. Michig (talk) 07:38, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

The Parkway Theater (Baltimore, MD)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:GNG. No independent sources. Mr. Guye (talk) 03:03, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Mr. Guye, how were independent sources referenced in the article at time of AfD "No independent sources"? And why did you put this into AfD in less than two hours of article creation  instead of either improving the article or placing an improvement tag on it? --Oakshade (talk) 19:45, 20 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep There are two independent sources in the article now. Here is a third source. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  06:24, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Maryland-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:41, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:41, 20 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment. This theater appears to be a contributing property to the North Central Historic District (Baltimore, Maryland). I'm not yet sure whether or not it should have a stand-alone article. • Gene93k (talk) 15:53, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. In addition to 's source - for which thanks - I found and added more local coverage, including about the local guy who's tried to get it restored. It's been a continuing story, meets GNG. The pictures on the archived version of his website suggest there may be coverage in books on American picture palaces. Apparently the name on the building is Parkway Theatre; if kept, the article should be moved, possibly to Parkway Theatre (Baltimore). Yngvadottir (talk) 17:23, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - It took less than 3 seconds to find independent in-depth sources.. It is obvious WP:BEFORE was not followed and this is not the first time this nom has started AfDs on new articles with zero research.  Might a RfC be in order? --Oakshade (talk) 19:54, 20 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Withdrawl Independent sources were found. --Mr. Guye (talk) 00:17, 21 December 2014 (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.