Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Guildford House

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. John254 00:56, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Guildford House[edit]

Delete unsourced article about a house, without indication that it is notable, like registered historical places or whatever the England equivalent, It doesn't seem to be a National Trust property which seems to be the premier lot. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:56, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. It isn't National Trust, it's owned by the borough. I've extended the article a little. --Paularblaster (talk) 00:34, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - If it's considered "historic" by a reliable source and it's a museum in of itself due to its historic uniqueness, it is notable. --Oakshade (talk) 17:44, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The creator put the following comment on the talk page, which should should be considered a Keep. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:30, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is a very pleasant house which is council property on the high street which can be toured. I'll get a picture for it next time I'm in Guildford. It certainly should not be deleted. SuzanneKn (talk) 19:27, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The "premier lot" are Grade 1 listed buildings, of which this is one of approximately 6000. Being a National Trust property is an indication of ownership, rather than notability. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:30, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Article has been improved considerably since it was nominated. Notability is sufficient for an article here.--Michig (talk) 20:31, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Grade 1 listing is for "buildings of outstanding or national architectural or historic interest", says it all really. RMHED (talk) 22:32, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, it's a Grade I listed building, which is roughly equivalent to being a National Historic Landmark for those of us on this side of the pond. Also, it appears to be a reasonably notable museum in its area, though I didn't fully check that out. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 01:29, 11 January 2008 (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.