Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wells Fargo Building (Augusta)

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. Sandstein 18:34, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wells Fargo Building (Augusta)

[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)

The article does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NBUILD: "Buildings, including private residences and commercial developments, may be notable as a result of their historic, social, economic, or architectural importance, but they require significant coverage by reliable, third-party sources to establish notability." Article does not have coverage that meets significant coverage by reliable, third-party sources to establish notability WP:RS, WP:SIGCOV and the article makes no claim that there is historic, social, economic, or architectural importance. WP:BEFORE revealed advertising, WP:ROUTINE, WP:MILL coverage, and directory style listings. // Timothy :: talk 15:00, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. // Timothy :: talk 15:00, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Georgia (U.S. state)-related deletion discussions. // Timothy :: talk 15:00, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:06, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:MILL and per nom. Not a historic nor important bank building. Bearian (talk) 02:49, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Bearian and nom Spiderone 11:25, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or merge - a skyscraper that was formerly the tallest building in the city, I have had trouble with a WP:BEFORE search due to geoblockers on US websites, but found [1] quickly after striking out on "Wells Fargo Building." The building has also had a number of different names per [2]. I've contributed to a number of building articles over the years, and an archival search should bring up plenty of information. We should probably also move the title of the building to reflect its current usage, and if we can't keep this, we should at least merge it to the university page. SportingFlyer T·C 18:16, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just about at my limit with WP:BEFORE (can't access local webpages due to geoblocking, can't access historical newspapers due to not being in the database I have access to) but I've added a couple sources that I could access to the page, including a mention in the Atlanta newspaper that this building was being built in Augusta. It's not a WP:MILL building, and I fully expect there's additional coverage out there that I'm not able to access for various reasons. SportingFlyer T·C 21:05, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz ^Humbug! 18:32, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Nom. The building is already included in the Augusta, Georgia article. Maybe article guardians will allow some expansion of the section? Note: The building is not a "skyscraper" by current accepted definition. Typically a Mid-rise building would be 5 to 12 floors and a high-rise would be 13 floor and above. A "skyscraper" would be defined as a building at least 492 feet with 40 floors, then there is "supertall" and "megatall" skyscrapers. The building would not be considered a skyscraper even if 100 meters were used as a minimum criteria. The Lamar Building, at 165' (50 m), fit the 19th century definition of skyscraper but would actually now be a high-rise "once considered a 'skyscraper". I can certainly be sympathetic to SportingFlyer being "just about at my limit". Everybody wants to now get a person to subscribe (for more targeted advertisement), or charge for just about any information, which makes Wikipedia even more important now days. However, the creation of permanent stubs to grow the encyclopedia should be weighed against if the content would be better suited in an already existing article. Otr500 (talk) 12:57, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Otr500: We just had a discussion over at the skyscraper page about the definition of skyscraper where we changed the lede to reflect there is no "current accepted definition." Also, I literally cannot access the sites I need to save this one because of geoblockers/lack of online access to the newspapers which would have covered it, not because the resources are paywalled, so I can't even say "here are the sources I can't access." Its inclusion in the Augusta, Georgia article is just a list and does not include any of the information about its architectural or historical importance to the city of Augusta (as I've WP:HEYed in the article, this was in the van der Rohe style, as noted by Georgia Tech's Georgia Encyclopaedia.) I've added a few more additional sources just now and identified mentions of the building in articles such as [3] which I can't access. SportingFlyer T·C 13:18, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 01:30, 6 December 2020 (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.