Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trans National Place


 * 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. (non-admin closure) Erik9 (talk) 20:03, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Trans National Place

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This article had promise several years back, but the topic -a proposed supertall skyscraper in Boston, Massachusetts- does not appear to even be proposed at the moment. The last news sources are more than a year old. Their are no plans to even begin preparing a building site, and the current building on the proposed site is a city parking garage which is still open, without plans to close or demolish it. The proposal (as well as this article) date back to a period when financing was still readily available for projects like this, and the likelihood this building would be fully developed was high and justified the article. With the economic crash, this plan is effectively shelved indefinitely, and no longer warrants an article. Hiberniantears (talk) 18:47, 1 August 2009 (UTC) Hiberniantears (talk) 18:47, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I should also add that I am the original editor who created the article. Hiberniantears (talk) 18:48, 1 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions.  --  The  left orium  19:00, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, appears to be notable, and if something was once notable, it's still notable. I can't find any other problems with the article to make it deserve deletion, either.  Nyttend (talk) 20:43, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep: As Nyttend says, notability is not temporary. Neither WP:N nor WP:CRYSTAL requires that something happen for certain to warrant an article, and that the current economic climate has this project on hold doesn't change that it hits WP:V.  A great many articles are about plans or projects that never came to fruition, but as long as they fulfill the requirements of WP:V, they don't need to have done so.   RGTraynor  22:12, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per Nyttend and RGTraynor. While Emporis indicates this is still an active proposal, if the building's construction is canceled, it will still be notable; when the project was active it received significant coverage from reliable third-party sources. Cheers, Rai • me  18:08, 4 August 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.