Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Woodlawn (Oilville, Virginia)

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:39, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Woodlawn (Oilville, Virginia)[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)

Doesn't meet the notability guidelines. All sources are dead or direct to a home page, but not the name of the house. Cannot prove that this is "historical" and notable. WikiAviator (talk) 06:09, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. WikiAviator (talk) 06:09, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. WikiAviator (talk) 06:09, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 08:11, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep Locations on the National Register of Historic Places are inherently notable per longstanding consensus, please drop the scare quotes. Periodic changes to the referenced National Park Service database disrupt links from time to time. Dead links are not a cause for deletion. I've warned the nominator about the implied bad faith in this and other nominations. Acroterion (talk) 12:04, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I fixed the dead link, and there's a more specific link to the National Register Information System's page on the house in the infobox. The National Register of Historic Places has a higher bar for listing than Wikipedia does for notability, so any individually listed property on it meets our guidelines. TheCatalyst31 ^{Reaction•Creation} 15:18, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It's been delisted from a couple of places, but not from the NRHP. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:02, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep per WP:GEOLAND and WP:TROUT to the nominator for multiple WP:DISRUPTIVE frivolous AfD nominations and negligent WP:BEFORE Wm335td (talk) 20:58, 24 October 2019 (UTC).[reply]
- And I'd note that notability is permanent - delisting or demolition do not constitute grounds for non-notability. Acroterion (talk) 23:19, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:GEOFEAT. Clearly notable. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:25, 25 October 2019 (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.