Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kirkland House Grand Colonial Queenslander, Brisbane

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. Courcelles 09:02, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kirkland House Grand Colonial Queenslander, Brisbane[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Blatant self promotion for a guest house, written by user with same name as the subject. The house itself is not notable, and is typical of thousand of others in Queensland. (That's why they're called Queenslanders). No references, the few that are listed do not even mention the place. Tone of the article is largely promotional. PROD was removed by creator without the issues being addressed. Dmol (talk) 11:21, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete generally per above, no apparent heritage listing &c, but the creator of the article may well be encouraged to add content to existing articles on the subject. Crusoe8181 (talk) 11:43, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. — Beloved Freak 13:26, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. — Beloved Freak 13:26, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. A search of the Queensland Heritage Register fails to find mention of it, so presumably it is not considered to be of any special historical significance. That makes it just a guesthouse. There are vast numbers of houses in the world dating from the 1880s and before. There are some streets that consist entirely of 19th century houses. We cannot possibly have articles on every one of them without good reason. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:35, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Insignificant dwelling, article being used to promote commercial interest. WWGB (talk) 13:51, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Notability not established and seems difficult to do with an unknown history. Promotional tone reveals article is more of an advert for accommodation services. - Shiftchange (talk) 08:35, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom. Stuartyeates (talk) 05:07, 23 July 2011 (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.