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. Even if the nomination is inaccurate, editors have presented valid arguments for deletion later. The request to keep the talk page discussion as a record of a page move discussion that also applied to other pages is reasonable so I'll leave it.
Jo-Jo Eumerus (
talk,
contributions)
17:32, 8 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Does not meet
WP:LISTN as almost all of these buildings are not notable and none of them are notable for height. Also, relies on a single source which is
WP:UGC and therefore not reliable.
Rusf10 (
talk)
14:58, 1 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Comment. LISTN is about whether the group or set has been the subject or coverage, not whether any or all of the individual members of that group or set are notable. So you have not yet presented a valid deletion argument. postdlf (talk)
15:04, 1 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Look, if you want to nominate something for deletion, it's up to you to plainly state what your argument is, and to make sure your argument is actually
valid. Your nomination claimed a guideline was not satisfied "because" of observations that had nothing to do with that guideline, which is what my comment pointed out to you. You're welcome. Now try harder. postdlf (talk)
21:33, 1 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Save the talk page. There is a 2016 multi-move request on the talk page that is linked from numerous similar talk pages. It should be preserved somewhere.
Station1 (
talk)
22:05, 1 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete When your tallest building is only 12 stories, you don't deserve a list of tall buildings. No sources discussing the topic of tall of buildings in Gary because there aren't any...
Reywas92Talk18:34, 2 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete, does not meet
WP:LISTN, no sources provided that discuss this group, or part of it, any notable buildings here can be included at
Gary, Indiana. And what is it about this obsession with tallest buildings, why not "Buildings in ...."? buildings don't have to be tall to be notable, and groups of buildings arent necessarily precluded from
sources just because they are not tall.
Coolabahapple (
talk)
03:03, 3 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete - A search failed to return any RS coverage of tall buildings in Gary, therefore the list fails
WP:LISTN. Article contains no reliably-sourced content that could be merged. –
dlthewave☎12:37, 7 July 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.
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. Even if the nomination is inaccurate, editors have presented valid arguments for deletion later. The request to keep the talk page discussion as a record of a page move discussion that also applied to other pages is reasonable so I'll leave it.
Jo-Jo Eumerus (
talk,
contributions)
17:32, 8 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Does not meet
WP:LISTN as almost all of these buildings are not notable and none of them are notable for height. Also, relies on a single source which is
WP:UGC and therefore not reliable.
Rusf10 (
talk)
14:58, 1 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Comment. LISTN is about whether the group or set has been the subject or coverage, not whether any or all of the individual members of that group or set are notable. So you have not yet presented a valid deletion argument. postdlf (talk)
15:04, 1 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Look, if you want to nominate something for deletion, it's up to you to plainly state what your argument is, and to make sure your argument is actually
valid. Your nomination claimed a guideline was not satisfied "because" of observations that had nothing to do with that guideline, which is what my comment pointed out to you. You're welcome. Now try harder. postdlf (talk)
21:33, 1 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Save the talk page. There is a 2016 multi-move request on the talk page that is linked from numerous similar talk pages. It should be preserved somewhere.
Station1 (
talk)
22:05, 1 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete When your tallest building is only 12 stories, you don't deserve a list of tall buildings. No sources discussing the topic of tall of buildings in Gary because there aren't any...
Reywas92Talk18:34, 2 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete, does not meet
WP:LISTN, no sources provided that discuss this group, or part of it, any notable buildings here can be included at
Gary, Indiana. And what is it about this obsession with tallest buildings, why not "Buildings in ...."? buildings don't have to be tall to be notable, and groups of buildings arent necessarily precluded from
sources just because they are not tall.
Coolabahapple (
talk)
03:03, 3 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete - A search failed to return any RS coverage of tall buildings in Gary, therefore the list fails
WP:LISTN. Article contains no reliably-sourced content that could be merged. –
dlthewave☎12:37, 7 July 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.