Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/La Capilla 525

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 redirect to San Salvador, without prejudice against restoration of the article citing reliable sources to ascribe notability. Der yck C. 17:12, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

La Capilla 525[edit]

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

This apartment complex lacks substantial RS coverage. Tagged for notability for over a year. Zero refs. Created by a 3-articles-edited-only-ever SPA. Epeefleche (talk) 23:25, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of El Salvador-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:26, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:26, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note - Torre 525 Avenida La Capilla was an article with substantially the same information. I've redirected it to La Capilla 525, but those looking into this may want to look at the article before the redirect. -- Whpq (talk) 16:21, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - This luxury condo project appears to have attracted coverage sufficient to establish notability. [1] is about it. [2] identifies it as the first luxury building in Bolivar. I suspect that there is other coverage available, but I'm not proficient in Spanish to look further. -- Whpq (talk) 16:27, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{Let's talk}_{about my edits?} 20:02, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A newspaper article like that would probably exist about any apartment building, and this one has only 30 units. So are all apartment buildings notable? And is "luxury" more notable than non-luxury, just because is more broadly advertised? I couldn't find any detailed notability guidelines for buildings, do we not have any? For anybody interested, there is a Spanish Wiki version at es:Torre 525 Avenida La Capilla. --Elekhh (talk) 22:16, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Elek -- is that a !vote, on your part?--Epeefleche (talk) 21:00, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It was a comment, highlighting the problem of a lack of consistent guidelines regarding the notability of buildings, even if probably is not the right place to discuss it. I often see articles as this one deleted when are about buildings in India or Brazil, but kept when is an US building (check out Category:Apartment buildings in the United States). The reason is of course the availability of online English sources and better quality of writing. The result is systemic bias. That being said, I lean towards delete or possible part-merge into San Salvador#Urban development or a to be created Housing in El Salvador, if anybody wishes to rescue it. --ELEKHH^T 00:17, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response. I'm fine with delete (obviously; as nom). Could live with redirect to the location you indicate (if verifiable). I think a merge would not be in order, however. All the text is uncited. And challenged (if that is not clear, I challenge it). As such, per WP:CHALLENGED, it would require inline cites that it does not have. Of course, if redirected, people could always create properly sourced info at the target article.--Epeefleche (talk) 07:51, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 20:58, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Just an apartment building like there are millions of around the world. No claim that it is special in anyway (e.g. designed by a famous architect, which doesn't seem plausible). No sources in article. S_peakF_ree ^(talk)_(contribs) 16:18, 11 February 2012 (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.