Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Academy (hotel)

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. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 20:47, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Academy (hotel)[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)

A non notable hotel with WP:BEFORE showing no evidence of reliable, substantial, secondary sources above and beyond WP:MILL Cardiffbear88 (talk) 08:57, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 08:57, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 08:57, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 08:57, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 08:57, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. The terrace which includes this hotel is Grade II-listed ([1]), so meets WP:GEOFEAT. The hotel itself isn't notable, but a possibility would be expansion and renaming to 15–49 Gower Street, London. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:51, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The hotel is notable and so is the conglomerate which owns it – YTL Corporation. As the building is also notable too, we are spoilt for choice. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:06, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The claims of the nomination are false. It is easy to find reliable, substantial secondary sources such as this and that. WP:MILL is just an arbitrary and opinionated essay which only amounts to WP:IDONTLIKEIT, contrary to core policy. In any case, the hotel is not run of the mill; it is exceptional being highly luxurious and historic. See WP:ATD; WP:BEFORE; WP:NEXIST; &c. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:00, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. London is full of thousands of “luxury” hotels and there’s no evidence this is notable above any others. There’s no evidence that the lifestyle magazine meets the criteria of WP:RS, leaving a review from the Telegraph. It’s highly promotional and not encyclopaedic. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 19:05, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There are indeed lots of hotels in London – so many that we have a category for them. This is not a problem per our policy WP:NOTPAPER which states that "there is no practical limit to the number of topics Wikipedia can cover". Andrew🐉(talk) 08:27, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just because we can, doesn’t mean we necessarily should. I still don’t believe this is notable per WP:GNG. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 09:03, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We already have an article. The proposal is that it now be deleted and it's the nominator's job to make a case for this action. My !vote stands. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:48, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep as coverage in Google News has it just at WP:GNG. Por ejemplo:
- Review in Telegraph
- Daily Beast coverage
- Travel Weekly has a short piece DiamondRemley39 (talk) 23:11, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, in theory, as not notable - not that there are no sources at all but not enough apparently to hold up the notability of this business, especially as most of them are promotional or else relate only to the building, not to the hotel. ("Interesting" is the suggestion above that it should be kept because there is already a category that it fits into). However, there do seem to be some possible redirect targets (Necrothesp's suggestion is a good one notionally but the article doesn't exist: is he willing to put it together straight away?), so I suppose, without much enthusiasm, that it could be pointed to one of them. Ingratis (talk) 16:45, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The Telegraph has reviewed hundreds and hundreds of hotels, this and routine industry news is not notability. GEOFEAT is not met with a Grade II listing, that generally requires grade I or II*. Reywas92^Talk 19:50, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- No, that isn't the case. WP:GEOFEAT clearly covers all listed buildings. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:49, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:GEOFEAT. Notable 5 star hotel. Wm335td (talk) 01:25, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:25, 24 August 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.