Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of tallest buildings in Sunny Isles Beach

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 no consensus‎. Editors remain broadly divided on the merits of these and similar lists. The introduction of notability considerations that apply only to some of the articles included in this nomination led to enough of a pile-up so as to make the emergence of any consensus highly unlikely. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 23:27, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

List of tallest buildings in Sunny Isles Beach[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)

For similar reasons as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of tallest buildings in Columbia, Missouri (2nd nomination) and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of tallest buildings in Syracuse, New York. Don't see how this article passes WP:NLIST. WP:NOTACATALOG. Natg 19 (talk) 22:04, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Lists, and Florida. Natg 19 (talk) 22:04, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also adding these similar articles in this nom:

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Minnesota and New Jersey. Natg 19 (talk) 22:07, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Natg 19 (talk) 22:10, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. Natg 19 (talk) 22:12, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all A bunch of listings of buildings in small towns. These clearly do not meet WP:LISTN. The buildings are not even that high. QuicoleJR (talk) 23:11, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete SIB and North Hudson For the first two...just all made up of random condo towers nobody would seriously catalog (and "North Hudson" feels like someone's pretend creation and not meant to be taken seriously). I feel like the other four for actual urban communities need to be separated into their own nom and am neutral on those. Nate • (chatter) 23:37, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe Keep Sunny Isles Beach, it's more filled out and has towers over 200 meters (650 ft). Believe it or not with a few more bigger towers being built now it actually ranks high among US skylines. Much more than all of these or List of tallest buildings in Syracuse. B137 (talk) 03:51, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Depending on how overzealous you guys are, I could show you hundreds to thousands of weak articles to go after, likely enough to put a dent in the 6.45 million front page article count, making it go down a little since in the post modern society, such superlatives inlcuding tallest building are no longer in vogue, with a good chance for example that Burj Khalifa will never be surpassed. B137 (talk) 03:56, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You're getting into WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS territory. The important part for this nomination is WP:LISTN. – The Grid (talk) 12:17, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all Azuredivay (talk) 10:42, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep All: information as to the tallest building in one's local area is a great example of encyclopedic knowledge. These articles may not seem notable to the others in this thread, but I empathise with the local Wikipedians in the area, and I would expect them to regard this kind of list as notable. A list of an area's tallest buildings of an urban community is considerably more notable than say, a list of all the burger kings in an area; sufficiently such that I think these articles are worthy of encyclopedic entries Jack4576 (talk) 11:32, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Sunny Isles and Comment on others. The construction of these buildings in Sunny Isles over the past 20 years has drawn considerable media attention, with several towers receiving critical awards, etc. The height argument presented above clearly does not apply here (or should be considered on its own for any article) as many of these buildings are taller than any in many lists for cities not proposed for deletion. Also, the “random condo towers” argument is not relevant either, or else the list for Miami should be considered for deletion as nearly all of those are condo buildings.Certainly the Miami Beach article is much less notable than this. Fredlyfish4 (talk) 14:24, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have been PRODing articles about those condo towers in Miami for the past 3-4 years. Those articles border on failing WP:GEOLAND and if that's been the case for 15 years - I don't see that changing any time soon. The focus has always been WP:LISTN and WP:SIGCOV when these go through AfD. – The Grid (talk) 15:36, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep All The articles are encyclopedic, provide ample sources and provide evidence of notability for each of these lists. Why merge / redirect hasn't been considered as an option is concerning. Alansohn (talk) 17:55, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am open to merge or redirect, if appropriate targets are found, but prefer deletion. Natg 19 (talk) 19:53, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep North Hudson per references in article (bad Wikipedia:BEFORE). Satisfies WP:LISTN.Djflem (talk) 19:39, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Adams, Arthur G. (January 1, 1981). The Hudson. SUNY Press. ISBN 9780791494226 – via Google Books.
- Wunsch, James L. (June 30, 1985). "New Jersey Opinion; Let's Guide Development to Save the Palisades". The New York Times – via NYTimes.com.
- http://www.guttenbergnj.org/_Content/pdf/plans/Master-Plan-Guttenberg.pdf ^{[bare URL PDF]}
- "10-Year Building Boom on Palisades Seems Over for Luxury Apartments". The New York Times. October 17, 1977.
- Norman, Michael (July 4, 1982). "Palisades: New York's Other West Side". The New York Times.
- Goldberger, Paul (25 January 1976). "The Palisades: Beauty and the Beast". The New York Times. Retrieved 17 June 2019 – via NYTimes.com.
- Cheslow, Jerry (October 9, 2005). "Blending Two Cities Into One". The New York Times – via NYTimes.com.
Comment The height argument clearly does not apply here or should be considered for any article: There is no Wikipedia policy or guideline about heights of buildings. Any made are simply I DON'T LIKE (and Wikipedia:JUSTDONTLIKEIT). Djflem (talk) 19:47, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That's a bad assumption. One look into the search for Wikipedia:List of tallest buildings shows 1,777 results but it doesn't seem like all of them point to such discussions. When I do a more exact search, I get 54 results but that still seems low. It seems non-notable buildings have been redirected to "List of tallest buildings in [Place]" in the past. I'll mention this the last time for this AfD, the focus is WP:LISTN. Can this list suffice notability on its own? If not, a merge to the place's name is a valid alternative to deletion but usually a deletion also suffices. – The Grid (talk) 13:02, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What is exactly you are referring to? What is the point you are trying to make about the height of the buildings or the size of the city? We see people not being impressed, but that is not the point. Not liking small city skylines is not a reason for deletion, tho that has been offered as reason in this discussion.Djflem (talk) 19:53, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Given how the ten most recent closed AfDs about "List of tallest buildings in XXX" all ended in delete (Charleston, Charleston, Beaumont, Raipur, Greensboro, Szczecin, Lansing, Little Rock, Durham, and Columbia), I don't think this one will end differently. WP:NLIST requires the group to be discussed in-depth as a set in multiple reliable sources, and I don't really see how that is met. There are over 4,000 cities all over the world with population over 100,000, if we let these cities pass, I see no reason that others won't try to create similar pages for others, and that would be pretty hard to maintain. Honestly this kind of information should just be added to the article about the city itself. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 01:20, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps the outcomes of those other AfDs were wrong and the more compatible GNG outcome would have been to retain those articles. Jack4576 (talk) 08:19, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
perhaps those AfDs were right. LibStar (talk) 14:07, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Who can say ! Jack4576 (talk) 15:19, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

LOTS AND LOTS of "tallest buildings in AREA" articles have been at AFD in the past, and "Kept". I tend to think most or all of those mentioned here must have been bad decisions, should be and will be reverted in effect by re-creation of those lists. I may work on that myself. --Doncram (talk,contribs) 16:55, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The requirement for them to be discussed in-depth as a group would result in far more of the US cities for which there are such lists failing than are listed here. So why are they also not included? The Sunny Isles article, while citations can be improved (and I would do so if kept), is better referenced than most of them. Sources such as these 1 2 3 are certainly closer to discussions on tallest buildings in a city than most US cities with lists have. Fredlyfish4 (talk) Fredlyfish4 (talk) 18:57, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
They got height limits from nearby airports increased from a 649' (198 meters) limit to near 750' (230 meters), making those few tallest going up possibly the 'tallest oceanfront towers in the US' as that article states. B137 (talk) 19:21, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete All - Most of the listed buildings are non-notable, and amounts to minor curiosities which don't need to be on Wikipedia. --TheInsatiableOne (talk) 13:16, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
whether something 'needs' to be on WP or not is not relevant. WP is full of minor curiousities Jack4576 (talk) 16:53, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
ITSINTERESTING isn't a reason to keep something. If someone wants a blog recording the tallest structures in this or that city then by all means. But it's not encyclopedic. TheInsatiableOne (talk) 07:38, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
ITSNOTINTERESTING isn't a reason to remove something either Jack4576 (talk) 08:25, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
>12000 pageviews in the past year suggests a decent amount of people out there find it interesting or are at least curious about the topic. Fredlyfish4 (talk) 22:43, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Again, ITSINTERESTING or ITSPOPULAR isn't a reason to keep. TheInsatiableOne (talk) 09:33, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:CSC, which does not require any articles on Wikipedia/notabilty to satisfy inclusion in a list. Djflem (talk) 20:08, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The buildings in Sunny Isles have been discussed together by at least one book 1, so other than personal sentiment there is no reason presented here for deletion. It is missing some of the newest buildings (which are discussed in individual sources, sometimes in reference to existing buildings), but in a rapidly developing place, requiring even brand new towers to be discussed would result in every single "list of" article failing. Fredlyfish4 (talk) 17:35, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes Sunny Isles, or now shady isles, is a coastal tower suburb miles out of the Miami or Fort Lauderdale or even the Miami Beach urban areas. The incidental urban density is just a side effect of its high density investments, or what is coined "accidentally urban", or "forced urbanity".[New Suburbanism: Sustainable Tall Building Development] With a few more 200 meter plus towers, it should rank as a top 10 skyline in the US, with all oceanfront addresses from end to end of the town soon to be large towers over what was once known as motel row. B137 (talk) 18:51, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep all, for reasons given in my comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of tallest buildings in Syracuse, New York. [AFD which seems headed for "Keep, obviously".--Doncram (talk,contribs) 16:55, 16 May 2023 (UTC)] Note also that Sunny Isles Beach, Florida (while the specific name of place seems unfamiliar to me) includes assertion "It is renowned for having the 14th tallest skyline in the United States despite its relatively low population." Related to my comments at the Syracuse AFD, an obvious alternative to deletion would be to merge the list of tallest buildings in Sunny Isles Beach to the Sunny Isles Beach article (i.e. to place the entire list there as a section, corroborating the "has a tall skyline" claim). And it would be an editing decision, okay to be undertaken at any time by decision of editors at its Talk page, to split that list back out again. --Doncram (talk,contribs) 15:34, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: It would be entirely unfair to delete the list of tallest buildings in Albany (capital of New York State) on basis of an AFD titled about a relatively unknown place such as Sunny Isles Beach (although the fact of there being tall skylines of beachside communities in Florida is more widely known). The naming of this AFD is in effect a sneaky try to delete stuff without proper scrutiny. An AFD titled about tallest buildings in Albany would obviously attract more !voters who would know that the AFD should be opposed. Above, I !vote Keep all, including for Sunny Isles Beach. --Doncram (talk,contribs) 15:34, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean by the name of the AfD? They have always been based on the {{PAGENAME}} magicword. – The Grid (talk) 13:32, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think I see what you mean now. AfD should have stayed with Sunny Isles Beach, it should have never added the other articles. – The Grid (talk) 12:13, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all none of these cities are known at all for having tall buildings; there is no reliable source that will collate data about the tallest building in random mid-sized American city. There is no inherent notability and encyclopedic-ness in such a topic; 14th tallest skyline is barely a thing and can be included in two sentences in the city article. The only places with "buildings by height" articles should be places that are known for having tall buildings: major metropolises like NYC or Shanghai where there is SIGCOV specifically of the fact that there are a lot of tall buildings in said city. AryKun (talk) 04:04, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So you're saying all cities in the US except the 13 above Sunny Isles with such lists should be deleted as well? Based on your opinion that these are random cities and despite there being reliable sources discussing them as a group? Fredlyfish4 (talk) 15:07, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect at least for buildings over 150 meters (492 or 500 ft), or even down to about 100 meters (328 ft) in domestic western areas. There is a reliable source, the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat, CTBUH, that not only categorizes cities' lists and geographical lists, but that also uses databases or FAA filings to correct the actual height of as built buildings, not just the initial height claims a proposed new building has. B137 (talk) 18:09, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
~~The other articles should have never been added to this AfD. I would be ok with a procedural close to separate these articles to separate AfDs. – The Grid (talk) 12:17, 16 May 2023 (UTC)~~[reply]
Comment: User:The Grid seems to be suggesting they will open 5 more AFDs after this AFD is closed. That would not be okay: the articles on five cities Albany NY, Camden NJ, Arlington VA, Rochester MN, and North Hudson NY have in fact been addressed, several with specific comments and all by the more general arguments. And here is more specifics: they each have one or more buildings over 100 meters, which is a very round number and has been a proposed cutoff for obviousness of notability of individual buildings in the past. Albany is distinct for having tallest buildings in NY outside NYC, and being capitol. Camden (across from Philadelphia), North Hudson (the skyline on the Palisades across from NYC), and Arlington VA are natural locations for clusters of tall buildings outside the major cities they adjoin. About Arlington: "Due to the height restrictions imposed in Washington D.C., many of the tallest buildings in the D.C metropolitan area are constructed in Arlington, right across the Potomac River from Washington." (Quote from its article). About Rochester MN, the 3rd biggest city in MN and home of the Mayo Clinic, it is in fact unusual because of the tallness of its buildings for a city of its modest size. It may be implied it has the highest ratio in the nation, or the tallest buildings of all cities in its size range, i am not sure. Anyhow, these are all valid lists, which readers expect Wikipedia to have. It would be weird/wrong to delete any one of them. Also all the other general reasons apply. Including they are valid editing splits off of articles about their cities; and they are valid splits out of "list of Tallest buildings in the United States", which like other huge lists can naturally be split by geographical areas. So, you had your potentally devious shot at deleting them for sake of deleting them (or for IDONTLIKEIT) and the answer is no, and it is not okay to immediately open 2nd or 3rd or 4th AFDs about them (nor should such AFDs ever be opened). -Doncram (talk,contribs) 05:27, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why The Grid (or others) should be forbidden to open multiple AfDs (though he did not sound like he was going to do that). He was instead recommending that the group AfD be closed and the articles be discussed on a case by case basis which is 100% valid. You have made your own viewpoints clear, but each article can be argued on its own merits, if a closer seeks to procedurally close. Natg 19 (talk) 06:04, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is exactly what I meant with my vote. When you group these as one, it's going to lead to what we're going to see: a "no consensus" result. The outcome to List of tallest buildings in [Place] lists have never been straight forward, they always have been on a case-by-case basis. Also, to answer @Doncram, why are you suggesting that I would proceed with AfDs after this? Much less, assuming I want these all deleted? The grouping is a bad form for this AfD, period. That's the main issue. – The Grid (talk) 15:44, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The closer can prove either or both of us wrong, but IMHO the correct result based on quality of arguments here is "Keep all". No one is forbidden from opening AFDs in the future, but IMHO it still would be wrong to waste others' time again. The topics have been discussed enough, and you (plural) have taken your shot. --Doncram (talk,contribs) 19:55, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please understand when I say "no consensus" it means the same as a "keep". – The Grid (talk) 01:28, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Some people also seem to suggest here that Sunny Isles is some random small suburb. The area between Miami and Fort Lauderdale is composed of many smaller cities, but it is one continuous, relatively dense urban area, and that is particularly the case around Sunny Isles. It is just a relatively geographically small city with a ton of very tall buildings, but the surrounding cities, particularly Aventura, Hallandale Beach, Bal Harbor, etc, have dozens (hundreds?) of smaller high rises (~20+ stories) still exceeding heights of many buildings in some of the other cities' articles, but no one would consider creating an article for. If these were all one city, I doubt this would be receiving the same criticism. Fredlyfish4 (talk) 14:24, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am sure the fact that the relative obscurity of "Sunny Isles Beach" name contributed to this list being targeted by deletionists. If there is a general name for part or all of the coastline between Miami and Ft. Lauderdale ("northeast Dade County"?), it would perhaps be good for editors to move and expand the article to cover the longer stretch of territory, after this AFD is concluded. The AFD close should not dictate that, it is just something editors could discuss at the Talk page. --Doncram (talk,contribs) 19:55, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep all as they provide (embedded) encyclopedic overview and insight into history, architecture, urban planning, development, housing, and lifestyle, of the various places. Satifies Wikipedia:SALAT, Wikipedia:LISTPURP, Wikipedia:LISTCRITERIA and Wikipedia:LISTN (which is specific about there not being a consensus about notability of these types of XofY lists). Djflem (talk) 06:52, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural Keep. Sunny Isles and Albany have enough reasonably tall buildings, with enough sources, to keep. Not sure about the others, with a leaning delete. Bearian (talk) 14:51, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:27, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Given all the large buildings, a list with details is notable. I would recommend keep for all the lists with North Hudson being questionable with only 2 entries on Wikipedia. Patapsco913 (talk) 16:53, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Following this relisting and all the previous comments, I have updated the Sunny Isles article with more context and references. The article does not rely on any unreliable sources. Multiple sources have been added that discuss these buildings in aggregate, satisfying LISTN. Many other sources added throughout support the notability of this article. Whether the other cities should be deleted (or better, merged), should be listed individually. Fredlyfish4 (talk) 18:12, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for developing that. As I suggest above already, I think the other cities have been defended adequately too. In my opinion wp:BEFORE was not performed adequately for Sunny Isles Beach and for the others too. --Doncram (talk,contribs) 19:55, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Wish this was not a group nom, but as a whole the article can meet WP:CLN AOAL for nav purposes. // Timothy :: talk 21:06, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The article has been improved including comparing its high rank to US and other Florida skylines, but is misleading in saying it's only 'near the top' in number of 'high rises' (>80 meters/250 ft) per city in FL, when in fact it is by far the second tallest skyline in Florida, where other cities like Fort Lauderdale and Orlando have zero buidlings in the List of tallest buildings in Florida, while Sunny Isles has at least eight, soon to be 12, Miami has more than 50, and Tampa and Jacksonville only have one or two each, while the other major cities of Orlando and FTL have 0. While it has no office towers or true downtown, a few of its buildings are architecturally striking and designed by 'starchitects', while also pushing over 200 meters (650 ft), the strictest cutoff height for true skyscrapers. B137 (talk) 02:33, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Update:Actually it's 14 soon to be at least 16. B137 (talk) 16:55, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all per above. Clear failure of notability for standalone lists. — Amakuru (talk) 11:39, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Can you be specific what fails here? None of the delete arguments above provide any meaningful or evidence-based argument for deletion, while the keep arguments and sources within the articles are quite clear. Fredlyfish4 (talk) 14:06, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all from arguments provided by Djflem and Doncram. There's no consensus regarding deletion, but I would note for the closing admin that future grouping of these lists should be discouraged. – The Grid (talk) 14:23, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Certainly keep List of tallest buildings in Sunny Isles Beach. Although the population isn't very high it does have an unusual concentration of very tall buildings and is therefore encyclopedic. The nomination compares it to List of tallest buildings in Columbia, Missouri, which had 12 entries, none taller than 55m (and the shortest only half that). This list has 20 buildings which are at least 130m tall, so they aren't comparable at all. This suggests to me that the bulk nomination wasn't a good idea. Hut 8.5 17:23, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Unbundle these AfDs. I haven't the time to examine notability in detail, but it's fairly clear that we've gotten to the point where individual cities need to be considered individually. Vanamonde (Talk) 17:33, 31 May 2023 (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.