Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kinard 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 delete. Wizardman 01:37, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kinard building[edit]

total non-notability of one-year use building Chris 15:39, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete It's a single building at a junior high school. Most definitely delete this one. Sdornan 15:43, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The energy efficiency and up-to-date technology might have made the case for notability if they were explained and if they were truly notable (for example, if it was the first school to use cold fusion to heat the building in the winter), but as it stands, the article doesn't give any indication that the building or the institution is notable. So, delete. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 16:59, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Absolutely non-notable building Corpx 17:11, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Golly, with notability like "successfully operated for one complete school year", I might just have to rethink those Disneyworld vacation plans and come here instead: "The marvel of the age! SEE! The amazing building which has stood without falling for one full year! WATCH! As it continues to stand... before your very eyes! GUARANTEED! Your money back if it happens to topple over while you're visiting!" Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 17:23, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, there are plenty of energy-efficient buildings in the world, no indication that this one is special or well-known. NawlinWiki 17:24, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 17:48, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
~~Weak delete~~Merge to district (Poudre School District); I'm probably the only one here who thinks it's interesting, but then I design schools for a living, many of them still standing after a year, and even energy efficient. Seriously, this building's won some awards, and is kind of notable, but I'd put it into the school district page. If it becomes a landmark in time (assuming it's still standing), then somebody can write about it. Acroterion_(talk) 19:27, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I think it's interesting that the school's official website and history section doesn't appear to even mention this building at all, much less anything special about it. I don't even think they consider it notable. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 20:39, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - If you're the architect, it's just depressing. It's amazing how things get taken for granted. That said, a pretty good criterion to delete. Acroterion _(talk) 20:51, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
delete - While I like school articles, a building at a school is a bit thin. Perhaps it should be added to a more general school/school district page per a suggestion above. --Rocksanddirt 19:35, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:N and WP:V. No sources. Don't bother redirecting -- you can't even ascertain the building's proper name from the article. (It lists three, not counting the one with the typo.) --Butseriouslyfolks 05:37, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep Acroterion, can you specify the awards?--its the sort of thing which might make for notability, probably though of the school, for being in a award winning building. The article could then be renamed to Kinnard Junior High School. We've accepted truly notable building as a criterion for the notability of schools. DGG 22:58, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- It's won the Building of America Honor as one of the 50 best construction projects in Colorado (yawn), the Fort Collins Urban Design Award for Green Design – 2006 (therefore notable within the city limits of Fort Collins), and CEFPI (Council of Educational Facility Professionals International) Rocky Mountain Chapter Peak Design Award – 2006 (umm). My personal criteria for notability via awards for recent buildings would be something along the lines of at the very least an award from the local chapter of the American Institute of Architects, or for green buildings a US Green Building Council LEED silver, gold or platinum certification. It doesn't have one of those. I'm trying hard here, but I think my original proposal stands. It should be mentioned in the Poudre School District article, and does not warrant its own article. Acroterion _(talk) 01:36, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

agreed that the awards do not seem notable. DGG 04:44, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- - I believe I'll take a stab at writing some notability standards for architecture, since no particular guidelines appear to exist. Acroterion _(talk) 01:38, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I am unconvinced by the assertion of notability. Buildings erected to a green standard are hardly that uncommon. Eusebeus 11:48, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- At this moment, completed green buildings are surprisingly uncommon. However, in the near future that will change, which is why I omitted mere LEED Certification and propose to set the bar higher, at least at the silver level. In any case, this building doesn't even have an official certification, so for the purposes of this debate, my proposal still stands. Acroterion _(talk) 12:10, 28 June 2007 (UTC).[reply]
see also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kinard Core Knowledge Junior High School

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.