Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Waterman–Smith Building

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 speedy keep. Criterion 2(d): nominations that are clearly an attempt to end an editing dispute through deletion, where dispute resolution is a more appropriate course. No prejudice against a policy-compliant re-nomination. (non-admin closure) ——SerialNumber54129 17:35, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Waterman–Smith Building[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

This seems to be non-notable and there are a LOT of conflicts between editors, several of which have suggested a XFD. BigDwiki (talk) 17:26, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. BigDwiki (talk) 17:26, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep Unless you can tell me where "conflict among editors" is a valid reason for deletion. An anon IP (likely a sock or meatpuppet) is the only editor who's suggested deletion. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 17:29, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Submitter's note: Multiple users have suggested deletion- here and here. Every user that disagrees with User:Ohnoitsjamie has been accused of being a sock and has been closed as unfounded. BigDwiki (talk) 17:32, 20 October 2019 (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.