Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Sage Gateshead

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. Thryduulf (talk) 22:15, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Sage Gateshead[edit]

Article listed for deleation as it is wrote as an Advert and no change or attempt to change since September 2009 has been made to rewrite the article //Melonite (talk) 22:10, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Does *anyone* think this building is not notable? This call for AfD seems completely procedural in nature... frustration over a lack of response to a maintenance tag. Many of the peacock-like phrases have been cleaned up in the past day or so. You want more? DavidRF (talk) 23:15, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep I wish now that I hadn't mentioned AfD when declining the speedy deletion request. I think the maintenance tag (which says to speedy delete the article) was barely if at all applicable to the article, and after recent improvements am convinced that it isn't. DVD 00:44, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 14:52, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 17:51, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 17:51, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep This is a very notable venue in the UK designed by a very notable architect. Apart from the references already in the article, observe Google News past month alone and all dates. This not what AfDs are for. The fact that the article on an obviously notable subject needs to be better written is under no circumstances grounds a for deletion. If an editor is impatient for an article's improvement, then... er... why not improve it themselves instead of wasting everyone's time here? AfD is to determine notability, not a way to force the removal of peacockery. If that were the case, there'd literally be 500,000 AfDs a day on Wikipedia. Voceditenore (talk) 18:24, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep. One of the most notable buildings in the North-East, and a quick glance shows that this article is in much better shape than most articles. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 19:24, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep - The nom has not given proper rationale for deletion of this article and has only given reasons for improvement. Clearly a very notable topic and this AfD looks pointy. --Oakshade (talk) 17:51, 12 June 2009 (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.