Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hyatt Regency Kolkata

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. Pax:Vobiscum (talk) 11:34, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hyatt Regency Kolkata[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 hotel is WP:Run-of-the-mill and fails WP:NBUILD and WP:GNG Wikiwriter700 (talk) 19:25, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 21:29, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 21:29, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 21:29, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 08:11, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep WP:Run-of-the-mill is an essay and "Essays have no official status, and do not speak for the Wikipedia community". Andrew🐉(talk) 11:45, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Sources in article are mainly about nn events held at the hotel, not about the hotel itself. WP:SIGCOV requires direct and in depth coverage; notability is not inherited from WP:ROUTINE WP:MILL coverage of nn events. Other sources seem to be 404. The one source that was a possible [1] for 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." is about the opening, but without anything else, it doesn't meet the guidelines. It's simply a normal, popular, well run, luxury hotel, nothing encyclopedic. // Timothy :: talk 10:38, 18 November 2020 (UTC) // Timothy :: talk 10:38, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete This article violates WP:PROMO, and there's no non-promotional text to keep. The sourcing in the article isn't great, either, though there are a couple there which work towards GNG. I'd delete on WP:PROMO grounds but would encourage recreation with better sources. SportingFlyer T·C 00:07, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: WP:NBUILD states "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 in-depth coverage by reliable, third-party sources to establish notability." Such coverage has not been presented here; references presented consist of few mentions in passing, and the list of (minor) awards is totally unreferenced. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:28, 26 November 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.