Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William Alexander (architect)

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 keep. ✗plicit 13:15, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

William Alexander (architect)

[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)

I see no evidence of notability except listing in a directory, nor does his work seem of particular importance. DGG ( talk ) 09:34, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – notable works. Seasider53 (talk) 11:20, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep While I am unable to access the books referenced, if they do indeed discuss this architect then we are some way towards passing WP:GNG. While the cited Scottish Architects is a directory, it includes a short biography that also counts towards establishing notability. Finally, it cites a book called Scotland's Splendid Theatres: Architecture and Social History from the Reformation to the Present Day which while I haven't accessed, it likely contains additional information on this architect. This is an architect of notable buildings (at least two of which have Wikipedia articles) and I feel the sourcing is adequate enough to meet GNG. NemesisAT (talk) 09:47, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

the bio in a directory does not count toards notability - espcially when it demonstrates that he did not build anything notable . DGG ( talk ) 08:30, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see no reason why it shouldn't, and there are four buildings listed in the article that are "notable" by our own standards! NemesisAT (talk) 08:45, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:00, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:00, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:00, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (probably). One could argue that since several of his buildings have been listed (including at Category A, the highest level indicating "buildings of special architectural or historic interest which are outstanding examples of a particular period, style or building type"), he probably satisfies NCREATIVE criteria 4a and 4c. I'd be surprised if someone who was elected as town architect for Dundee, and served in the role for 30 years, hadn't been written about in architectural histories of the period with enough coverage to satisfy GNG; I haven't performed a thorough search for them though, so cannot confidently say that they exist. The individual has long been dead, so there is no concern about promotion or BLP violations - I don't think that a short article about a marginally notable Victorian architect is harmful to the project. Girth Summit _(blether) 12:35, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Notable buildings and sufficient referencing establishing notable architectural contributions in Scotland. Coldupnorth (talk) 22:17, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, due to multiple notable buildings and references.Jackattack1597 (talk) 09:39, 9 October 2021 (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.