Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1000 Connecticut Avenue

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 per added sources. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:05, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1000 Connecticut Avenue[edit]

A 13-floor building. No explanation of why it is important or interesting, sources are directory entries and so is this article. WP:NOT a directory. Guy (Help!) 21:52, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for lack of apparent notability. Thirteen stories? Oh my! I'm getting all dizzy and swimmy-headed a lookin' at it. This is Wikipedia at its best and worst. The only reason it's here is that someone compiled a List of tallest buildings in Washington, D.C. and couldn't stand the thought that the "Top 40" of buildings wouldn't be all blue links. The double-brackets system is how articles get created. Say that you mention a building at 1430 K Street. Then you put brackets around it 1430 K-Street and discover it's a "red link". Can't have an ugly red link messing up the sapphire entries, so write an article to make 1430 K Street. Isn't that prettier? Yes, and it leads to articles like this, where there's nothing apparently notable about the 13-floor so-called "highrise skyscraper". The downside of a deletion is that it will become a redlink somewhere, and then maybe someone who actually cares about 1000 Connecticut Avenue will show why it should be considered important. Mandsford (talk) 23:28, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I expanded it the most I could with more sources and information.S_RX 02:13, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep; After SRX expanded the article with additinal sources, the article does not deserve to be deleted. Good work SRX! Leitmanp (talk | contributions) 03:06, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Wow! 47 meters tall! Delete per Mandsford. Shouldn't it say "low rise building?"Edison (talk) 04:59, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- It is classified as a high-rise building due to the Heights of Buildings Act of 1910. It is in the article.--S_RX 14:27, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I can't find a better source, but it looks like it's HRC's campaign headquarters.[1] - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 05:36, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notability is not inherited. Where are the sources about this building rather than giving it as an address for its occupants? Guy (Help!) 10:49, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the architects (Pei Cobb Freed & Partners) are notable, but so prolific that it is hard to document every project. In fact, the project architect James Ingo Freed died while the building was under construction. So it is still under construction, not scheduled for completion until 2009 when press coverage and more information is likely to arrive. Height is not the issue for this building, as every building in DC is limited by the Heights of Buildings Act which we should have an article on. I imagine it is possible to dig up information on the building it is replacing, but I'm not going to. I was confused because the prior building's date is credited in the info box, which with the article's name makes this article sort of about the address which the title but most of the information is about the building being built not the one it replaced. Here's an article in the Washington Business Journal about it that looks pretty good. [2] and says it was Freed's final design, which I think is noteworthy. dvdrw 00:09, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per article improvements. Cheers. _{Trance addict - Armin van Buuren - Oceanlab} 03:07, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per improvements.Huang7776 (talk) 03:24, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Sounds much like a run-of-the-mill building. Has plenty of blue links and references, but nothing that shows it is encylopedic at a global or even a local point-of-view. Sebwite (talk) 18:20, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Sources provided establish notability. Alansohn (talk) 20:39, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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.