Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kinnoull Terrace

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. This does not preclude anyone choosing to merge the article later. Stifle (talk) 10:47, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kinnoull Terrace[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Kinnoull Terrace (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There is no evidence that Kinnoull Terrace is in any way notable, and certainly not in a fashion which meets WP:N. This article is some sort of WP:SYNTH based on the happenstance that the few properties on the road are amongst the many listed properties of Perth.

Referring to the references:

  • 1 - Perth and Kinross, John Gifford (2007) p.655 - has nothing much to say about the subject beyond confirming that it has a number of houses on it.
  • 2 - Kinnoull Conservation Area Appraisal - mentions the terrace once, to state there is a Tree Preservation Order on it.
  • None of the Historic Environment Scotland refs, nor the architect refs, have anything to say about the terrace.

--Tagishsimon (talk) 16:16, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep and rename to Kinnoull Conservation Area, which clearly is notable. Djflem (talk) 18:44, 28 February 2022 (UTC) becomes:[reply]
  • Merge >>> List of listed buildings in Kinnoull, Perth and Kinross.Djflem (talk) 17:35, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and oppose move/Merge to [[List of listed buildings in Kinnoull, Perth and Kinross]]. Page 30 of this document (2 above) indicates that the conservation area is a substantial area of Kinnoull, while this street and the villas on it are a very small portion of it. Page 5 says Scotland has over 600 conservation areas, but I can't find articles on any of them – the conservation areas in England don't have their own articles, but this list rather links to the villages or other place in which the conservation area is located. Coverage at Kinnoull of the conservation area and major listed buildings there (the document describes several) including on the terrace may be appropriate, but this street certainly isn't on its own notable for having a few B- and C-listed buildings. Reywas92Talk 19:41, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've moved the information to Kinnoull and will integrate it more into a conservation-area topic. Seasider53 (talk) 20:57, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • I counted 56 listed buildings in the area on this map, most of which are in the conservation area. That's a fraction of those across the river in the Perth Central conservation area! I wouldn't think this is due weight or needs to be in a singular article either. Reywas92Talk 22:10, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
        • Note that the problem with our Kinnoull article is that it is (or at least was until today) terrible, starting out sourced to a bowling club's WWW site and not really getting much better. (It gained the cricket club's, the archery club's, and the tennis club's WWW sites as sources.) It doesn't even explain that this "residential area" was in fact a parish. The fact that it has more about the sports' clubs and their WWW sites than it has about the history might be a weight problem, but it's a weight problem with the sports' clubs rather than the history if it is. There's probably quite a lot to be written about Kinnoull in our Kinnoull article.
          • Lewis, Samuel (1851). "Kinnoull". A Topographical Dictionary of Scotland: Comprising the Several Counties, Islands, Cities, Burgh and Market Towns, Parishes, and Principal Villages, with Historical and Statistical Descriptions: Embellished with Engravings of the Seals and Arms of the Different Burghs and Universities. Vol. 2. London: S. Lewis and Company. p. 89.
          • Hume, William (1979). "The Parish of Kinoull". In Taylor, David B. (ed.). The Counties of Perth and Kinross. Third statistical account of Scotland. Vol. 27. Culross. pp. 401 et seq. ISBN 9780903589383.
          • Gifford, John, ed. (2007). Perth and Kinross. Pevsner: Buildings of Scotland. Vol. 10. Yale University Press. ISBN 9780300109221.
        • Similarly, the word "village" occurs nowhere in Bridgend, Perth and Kinross, even though a cursory perusal of history books and gazetteers reveals that this "residential area" was in fact a "village for the boatmen who run the ferries across the River Tay" and a burgh of barony.
          • Lewis, Samuel (1851). "Bridgend". A Topographical Dictionary of Scotland: Comprising the Several Counties, Islands, Cities, Burgh and Market Towns, Parishes, and Principal Villages, with Historical and Statistical Descriptions: Embellished with Engravings of the Seals and Arms of the Different Burghs and Universities. Vol. 1. London: S. Lewis and Company. p. 162.
        • Uncle G (talk) 01:35, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Clearly passes WP:GEOFEAT as it is lined with listed buildings. Suggesting WP:SYNTH is ridiculous - the listed buildings don't just appear out of nowhere and get plonked down on the street. The histories of a street and its buildings are completely intertwined. Either we have articles on every listed house (which some editors have objected to in the past) or we have a single article on the street. Which is better? -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:15, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • This is dead false. There is no basis in geofeat whatsoever that because a road has listed buildings on it, the road is notable. The map of listed buildings shows that across the river in Perth, Marshall Mews has many listed buildings. James Street, Perth has many, St. John Street, Perth has many, St. John's Place has many, South Street, Perth, Scotland has many, George Street, Perth has many, Atholl Place has many, High Street, Perth has many, Charlotte Street, Perth has many, and practically every building on Barossa Place and Ross Terrace is listed too. Scroll over to Dundee and see the same thing, with basically every street in the conservation area lined with category B and C listed buildings. That simply a lie to say that a street (or short residential block) is notable because a few buildings on it are listed. And no, not every listed house (especially the tens of thousands of category B and C listings, which represent regional or local importance: Kinnoull Terrace's buildings are mostly designated local importance) is notable and needing an article for itself or immediate location. You could make articles matching List of Category A listed buildings in Perth and Kinross (only 56/195 of those with national importance have articles: many castles, churches, and bridges, few houses) as List of Category B listed buildings in Perth and Kinross and List of Category C listed buildings in Perth and Kinross, but not broken out by street. Ridiculous. Reywas92Talk 14:52, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • According to WP:GEOFEAT, every listed building is indeed notable. And bear in mind that Wikipedia is a work in progress. Any of those streets could have an article. What reason would you have to object to this? -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:58, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
        Notability is not inherited. In addition, I don't think it's at all obvious that all listed buildings are obvious - WP:GEOFEAT states "on a national level", and Categories B and C specifically are "of regional or more than local importance" and "of local importance" respectively; certainly not national. eviolite (talk) 05:49, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • Several of those red-linked roads do have articles, just for the record. Seasider53 (talk) 14:59, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
        • I see; South Street and High street are notable for being major streets of the city, not merely for being a small residential block with a few listed buildings. List of listed buildings in Perth, Scotland is better than having separate articles for each of the scores of streets on which the hundreds of these are located. Reywas92Talk 15:42, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
          • I'm leaning towards keep since the street exists purely because of the buildings. I'll try to find a similar example, understanding that that won't be an acceptable reason in and of itself. Seasider53 (talk) 16:04, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
            • Angel Street, London – a short street that was rebuilt after the Great Fire of London. Doesn't have any notable buildings.
            • Chiswell Street, London – a short street that has a couple of listed buildings on it.
            • Millbrae Crescent, Glasgow – a row of Category A listed buildings by they-don't-know-who.
            • Someone asked why Sackville Street in Manchester was notable. It wasn't PROD'd, and an editor said it wasn't notable in itself but it had a "notable historic building".
            • Finally, there's Botanic Avenue in Belfast, which has zero references and zero reasons for its notability, other than having a railway station and a college on it, which was questioned seven years ago.
            • Was hoping to find one that had been PROD'd or nominated for deletion, but didn't see one. My point is that the policy seems very vague as it stands, as evidenced by our disagreements here. I'm saying keep, but if the consensus ends up being delete, I'm happy to incorporate the information elsewhere. Seasider53 (talk) 17:52, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
              • Well I've PRODed four of those...happy to take to AFD. Millbrae Crescent is arguably about the A-listed row of buildings itself rather than the street generally. I think the policy is clear: nothing says a street is notable because there are low-level designations of buildings on the street, which applies to an absurdly high number of roads in the world. Reywas92Talk 05:30, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The street itself does not pass GNG, and WP:GEOFEAT does not apply to streets. Yes, it applies to the listed buildings, but notability is not inherited. Instead, the relevant SNG is the one below it, WP:GEOROAD, which is essentially a restatement of GNG, which again has not been shown to be met. eviolite (talk) 05:46, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • You see, this turns into a bit of a circular argument. Editor A: Just because WP:GEOFEAT says all listed buildings are notable that clearly doesn't mean they are (i.e. WP:IDONTLIKEIT). Editor B: Okay, if there are several along a single street then we'll group them into a single article, which will mean not creating an article for every single listed house. Editor A: But WP:GEOFEAT doesn't say that streets are notable just because they have listed buildings on them, WP:INHERIT, WP:GEOROAD, etc, etc, etc. Editor B: Well, let's create an article for each listed building then. Editor A: Just because WP:GEOFEAT says all listed buildings are notable that clearly doesn't mean they are... Ad infinitem. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:54, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      We don't need to group buildings by street for the sake of having them, they're grouped by community and should be at List of listed buildings in Kinnoull, Perth and Kinross. Category:Lists of listed buildings in Scotland has over 1,000 articles for the purpose of listing the 50,000 articles for each listed building in Scotland. Reywas92Talk 17:25, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      Sorry, where does it say they should be "grouped by community"? The only guideline we have is that every listed building is presumed notable. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:20, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      Lists still need to be notable. Kinnoull Terrace has not been proven to be independently notable, while the parish obviously is. eviolite (talk) 15:07, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      That would be true is this were a list! However, it is not. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:36, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect as appropriate. Bearian (talk) 15:26, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 15:13, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:42, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep (officially, after umming and ahhing above previously), having seen policies being misinterpreted. Seasider53 (talk) 00:50, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and expand. Satisfies GNG. This nomination is based, and all the arguments for deletion are based, entirely on the assertion that the buildings on either side of a street are not part of the street. That assertion is contradicted by certain reliable sources (eg [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]). James500 (talk) 10:42, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Uhhhhh none of these sources have anything to do with this subject. None of this arguments say the buildings are not part of the street, they say that these buildings should be described a whole and the street boradly, not synthetically because they happen to be located on it. Reywas92Talk 16:22, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to Kinnoull. A street can have some modicum of notability and still be best represented as a section in a larger article. BD2412 T 01:31, 21 March 2022 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Kinnoull_Terrace&oldid=1078396049"