- 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 delete. Randykitty ( talk) 17:07, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
- Harker House ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Though this now-demolished building was old, it was not officially designated a provincial or national historic site. Being considered historic at the local level does not confer notability. No reliable source to confirm notability otherwise beyond local area. This good faith creation simply is not notable.
Note: This and similar articles were PRODed and no objections were received within seven days, but this and the others were objected shortly thereafter before they were reviewed by an admin, hence this now being an AfD. The reason for the objection was "Because the articles seem to have merit". Hwy43 ( talk) 21:15, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Hwy43 ( talk) 21:31, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
- Merge into Magrath per WP:ATD and WP:PRESERVE. Andrew D. ( talk) 22:20, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
- Delete The article doesn't mention anything notable about this house. There's no mention of unique architecture. If it was built for a bank manager it can't be one of the oldest houses. There is no indication that it had newsworthy history before it was demolished. Wikipedia is not an WP:INDISCRIMINATE collection of information. The article about Magrath doesn't mention the bank, but even if a small section was added about it, not more than one sentence about the manager's house would be needed. It's listed as an "attraction" in the Magrath article, but with no indication of what made it interesting. — Anne Delong ( talk) 18:11, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 17:52, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
- Delete - Can't find anything to show the notability of this particular house. Onel5969 TT me 13:57, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
- Delete No evidence that this property was considered significant; there does not appear to have been any attempt to salvage it after it caught fire. It had been surveyed by the Alberta Register of Historic Places (the only reference), but was never actually listed as historic. -- MelanieN ( talk) 21:45, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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 delete. Randykitty ( talk) 17:07, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
- Harker House ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Though this now-demolished building was old, it was not officially designated a provincial or national historic site. Being considered historic at the local level does not confer notability. No reliable source to confirm notability otherwise beyond local area. This good faith creation simply is not notable.
Note: This and similar articles were PRODed and no objections were received within seven days, but this and the others were objected shortly thereafter before they were reviewed by an admin, hence this now being an AfD. The reason for the objection was "Because the articles seem to have merit". Hwy43 ( talk) 21:15, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Hwy43 ( talk) 21:31, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
- Merge into Magrath per WP:ATD and WP:PRESERVE. Andrew D. ( talk) 22:20, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
- Delete The article doesn't mention anything notable about this house. There's no mention of unique architecture. If it was built for a bank manager it can't be one of the oldest houses. There is no indication that it had newsworthy history before it was demolished. Wikipedia is not an WP:INDISCRIMINATE collection of information. The article about Magrath doesn't mention the bank, but even if a small section was added about it, not more than one sentence about the manager's house would be needed. It's listed as an "attraction" in the Magrath article, but with no indication of what made it interesting. — Anne Delong ( talk) 18:11, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 17:52, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
- Delete - Can't find anything to show the notability of this particular house. Onel5969 TT me 13:57, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
- Delete No evidence that this property was considered significant; there does not appear to have been any attempt to salvage it after it caught fire. It had been surveyed by the Alberta Register of Historic Places (the only reference), but was never actually listed as historic. -- MelanieN ( talk) 21:45, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
- 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.