Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/524 East 72nd Street

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 Seems now everyone is in agreement, including the nominator so keep. Glen 00:45, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

524 East 72nd Street

[edit]

Outside of the October 11 plane crash, this building has no claim to fame. Thus, all the content existent in this article exists in the article for the plane crash. The building itself is not important enough to have its own article. -- tariqabjotu 21:15, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Redirect per Evil Monkey. We do not document every apartment building, and this one is only notable as the site of a plane crash that, lo and behold, has its own article that already includes all the content about this building. AFD was not necessary to resolve this edit war caused by Aaron with at least three others (including myself), all of whom he smeared as vandals. Postdlf 21:24, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

*Merge into Belaire Apartments per RaccoonFox and Amaas120. --Aaron 21:49, 11 October 2006 (UTC) Changing vote, see below.[reply]

*Redirect to October 11 plane crash per above comments. This deserves its own article no more than the field which a plane crashed into on 9/11, or the buildings around the World Trade Center that were destroyed by the collapse. -Amarkov babble 23:45, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Redirect to October 11 plane crash - The incident is notable, but the building is not. I checked to see if it was included in the 1000-page American Institute of Architects Guide to NYC, and it's not. --Aude (talk) 23:52, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep.It doesn't have any claim to fame other than that- but it should have the article due to the plane crash. However, more info is needed about the building itsef, as this is an article abour the BUILDING, not the crash. The crash should have a section, and other info about the building should also be added. I was looking fore more info about the building after the crash, but I couldn't find anything otherwise. -- Reportell
  • It shouldn't have an article just because of the plane crash. The notability of an incident is not automatically transferred to the place where it occurred. The fact that you can't find any info about it that isn't related to the plane crash is even more of a reason to merge/redirect. -Amarkov babble 00:03, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Corey Lidle is not nearly as notable as JFK. Regardless, the Texas Book Depository didn't automatically become notable after JFK was shot there. It did indeed become notable because of that incident, but in a couple months, I doubt anybody will remember "Hey, there was a plane crash at 524 East 72nd street!". They'll just remember that there was a plane crash. Things may become notable because of an incident, but notability of the incident is not automatically transferred. -Amarkov babble 00:17, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
True enough, and i agree with you. However, I think Yankees fans may remember this for quite a while longer than most other people. I do know that this isn't Yankeepedia, but perhaps we should at least delay deleting this until collective social memory of this starts to fade (say, after a few months)? RaccoonFox • Talk • Stalk 00:22, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Why erase history. Isn't history ment to be remembered, not forgotten? --71.200.61.10 03:47, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all articles on buildings in Manhattan. --Tothebarricades 00:24, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Actually, all U.S. towns and census-designated places (however small) have articles, and high schools are generally deemed notable. There would be articles on both Shanksville and Columbine anyway. As for this building, I would have voted keep if it was listed in my AIA Guide (which includes 5000+ NYC buildings, including many in the immediate neighborhood of this apt building). I was looking to it as a source, but found nothing on this building to be able to expand the article. I also looked through the NY Times archives (pre-today) and found next to nothing (only real estate sales and such). --Aude (talk) 02:57, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Buildings are notable on size now? In that case, there's this hotel over in San Jose. Nobody who doesn't live near here or has stayed in it has EVER heard of the building, but it's a solid 35 stories high, and has 2 pools, and 2 tennis courts. Think it's notable? -Amarkov babble 04:06, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well geese sorry for having an opinion, but I just went back and read the article, its a hospital too. Besides it's 50 freakin Stories, in my world that is pretty noteable considering the tallest building in Western Canada is the Petro-Canada Centre and that is barely taller then that. --Cloveious 04:14, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
50 stories is about medium for a New York City skyrise. Besides, a building is not notable simply for being big, nor is it for being a hospital. And a sucession of non-notable things does not add up to something notable. -Amarkov babble 04:20, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Okay if you belive that why don't you go through List of Towers, and List of hospitals and start afd'ing everything --Cloveious 04:23, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Because the hospitals do not get their own articles. And for the towers, the ones that are famous in connection to a famous event actually ARE famous. If you refer to the 524 East 72nd street crash a couple months from now, or even right now, people will say "Um... what the hell are you talking about?" On the contrary, if you mentioned, say, the Texas School Book Depository, people would know that is where JFK was killed. -Amarkov babble 04:29, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh Snap, your questionable logic has failed! Hospitals have there own articles, Foothills Medical Centre, Brampton Memorial Hospital Campus, Georgetown Hospital, St. Peter's Hospital, Hamilton to name a few, and if you look at List of Towers you can find lots that are far more questionable then this. But what do I know I totally think that Altar candlestick and Altar candle should totally be merged are not noteable, but what do I care Wikipedia is a riot of free opinion and interest and if you want to mock my choice of a keep vote cram it and keep it to yourself. --Cloveious 04:42, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This should be obvious, but telling people to shut up and just accept your opinion is kinda frowned upon. And for what it's worth, none of the articles you mentioned consist solely of structural information. -Amarkov babble 04:46, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Notable enough for Redirect There are thousands of buildings in NYC more notable that this one and that are nor in WP. You might want to research and write entries on those. The rule is: if most of what is notable about this building is contained in the accident entry, a Redirect is right way to acknoledge its notability.--Gkklein 17:23, 13 October 2006 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/524_East_72nd_Street&oldid=1142654367"