Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/524 East 72nd Street

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 Seems now everyone is in agreement, including the nominator so keep. Glen 00:45, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 524 East 72nd Street

Outside of the October 11 plane crash, this building has no claim to fame. Thus, all the content existent in this article exists in the article for the plane crash. The building itself is not important enough to have its own article. -- tariqabjotu 21:15, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

  • Keep. This is a pure content dispute. The article has existed for less than two hours; some editors grabbed the content and shoved it into October 11, 2006 New York City plane crash; now they want to delete the article from which it came. Further content will come. And just to be fair, I'll note — Note to closing admin: Aaron (talk • contribs) is the creator of the article that is the subject of this AfD.. --Aaron 21:18, 11 October 2006 (UTC) Changing vote, see below.
  • Strong Keep: Now it does have claim to fame. It just takes one event to make something famous. Belaire Apartments did not have an article prior to Oct. 11... So What? Now it's notable and now it does! (my original vote for 524 East 72nd Street was changed from "keep" to "merge to Belaire Apartments" - which it was). Then the article Belaire Apartments came up for deletion. Thus my vote on the matter now is: "Strong Keep".64.12.116.70 21:21, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep as per above BrenDJ 21:19, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Redirect to October 11 plane crash article. If the plane hadn't crashed into it, I don't think it would have been notable enough to get an article. Evil Monkey - Hello 21:20, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Note to closing admin: User:Evil Monkey is directly involved in this article dispute [1]. --Aaron 21:22, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Editing the article does not lessen the weight of his opinion. -- tariqabjotu 21:26, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
  • "Directly involved" is a stretch. I clicked on The Belaire and was met with a double redirect, as at the time 524 East 72nd Street was redirected to October 11, 2006 New York City plane crash. So I fixed the double redirect, explaining my edit. I then looked at the history and saw that Aaron was using using the word "vandalism" in edit summaries in reverting an edit that I thought was in good faith, so I left a comment on his talk page regarding this. Evil Monkey - Hello 21:33, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Redirect per Evil Monkey. We do not document every apartment building, and this one is only notable as the site of a plane crash that, lo and behold, has its own article that already includes all the content about this building. AFD was not necessary to resolve this edit war caused by Aaron with at least three others (including myself), all of whom he smeared as vandals. Postdlf 21:24, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Note to closing admin: User:Postdlf is directly involved in this article dispute [2]. --Aaron 21:29, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: The edit history clearly shows at least seven other editors (as of this writing) are interested in expanding this article. In addition, a separate editor created Belaire Condominiums, which is now in a rational merger discussion since nobody simply blanked the page as if they owned it. --Aaron 21:29, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Speedy keep, I have been watching this live on BBC for two hours. This is top news globaly. -- Petri Krohn 21:40, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment Todays issue of Helsingin Sanomat, Finland's leading newspaper, has a six column picture of the building on its front page. No picture of Cory Lidle or the airplane. The building will be of interest 50 years from now, no one will remember the plane or its pilot. I propose that, as soon as the dust settles, we merge the accident to the building. -- Petri Krohn 17:30, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge - Merge with the Bel Air condominium article, and redirect this one to the Bel Air condo.--andrewI20Talk 21:42, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge into Belaire Apartments, its official name from several sources. RaccoonFox • Talk • Stalk 21:44, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

*Merge into Belaire Apartments per RaccoonFox and Amaas120. --Aaron 21:49, 11 October 2006 (UTC) Changing vote, see below.

  • Comment I have already merged the articles. Seems that this is now a discussion on Belaire Apartments, as the AfD boiler plate with a reference to this AfD discussion was posted to that article. -- Petri Krohn 22:05, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Redirect for the reasons stated above, notably EvilMonkey. Tamajared 22:12, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Now with the plane chrah it is absolutely necessary.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.190.74.105 (talk • contribs)
  • Redirect to October 11 plane crash, not notable outside the current event. --Daniel Olsen 23:15, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. Large building, notable for recent incident. Owen 23:33, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

*Redirect to October 11 plane crash per above comments. This deserves its own article no more than the field which a plane crashed into on 9/11, or the buildings around the World Trade Center that were destroyed by the collapse. -Amarkov babble 23:45, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

  • Changing vote to Keep. It has enough information unrelated to the crash now. I had assumed that more information didn't exist. -Amarkov babble 02:41, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Yes, I noticed that. This article still needed more information to justify keeping it, but now that there is more information... -Amarkov babble 13:22, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Redirect to October 11 plane crash - The incident is notable, but the building is not. I checked to see if it was included in the 1000-page American Institute of Architects Guide to NYC, and it's not. --Aude (talk) 23:52, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep.It doesn't have any claim to fame other than that- but it should have the article due to the plane crash. However, more info is needed about the building itsef, as this is an article abour the BUILDING, not the crash. The crash should have a section, and other info about the building should also be added. I was looking fore more info about the building after the crash, but I couldn't find anything otherwise. -- Reportell
  • It shouldn't have an article just because of the plane crash. The notability of an incident is not automatically transferred to the place where it occurred. The fact that you can't find any info about it that isn't related to the plane crash is even more of a reason to merge/redirect. -Amarkov babble 00:03, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Corey Lidle is not nearly as notable as JFK. Regardless, the Texas Book Depository didn't automatically become notable after JFK was shot there. It did indeed become notable because of that incident, but in a couple months, I doubt anybody will remember "Hey, there was a plane crash at 524 East 72nd street!". They'll just remember that there was a plane crash. Things may become notable because of an incident, but notability of the incident is not automatically transferred. -Amarkov babble 00:17, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
True enough, and i agree with you. However, I think Yankees fans may remember this for quite a while longer than most other people. I do know that this isn't Yankeepedia, but perhaps we should at least delay deleting this until collective social memory of this starts to fade (say, after a few months)? RaccoonFox • Talk • Stalk 00:22, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
Why erase history. Isn't history ment to be remembered, not forgotten? --71.200.61.10 03:47, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
Keep all articles on buildings in Manhattan. --Tothebarricades 00:24, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete after merging content to plane crash article. — Reinyday, 00:50, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Redirect to crash. The building isn't notable any other way that is mentioned. -Goldom ‽‽‽ ⁂ 01:20, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Redirect (and maybe merge), reasonable search term. JYolkowski // talk 02:21, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep since merger with Belaire Apartments is done yet AfD was not closed. --Aaron 02:27, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep; if this is non notale, neither is a town of 300, a fictional city in California or some high school in Colorado . Pacific Coast Highway (blah • lol, internet) 02:43, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
    • It's a matter of substance; the independent content of all three of the articles you give as comparisons dwarf what can be said about this building outside of the plane crash, even if we kept the cruft about its garage and "prominent" East River views. It's just not a topic that can stand alone apart from the crash, so let's redirect it to an article that has already easily digested its scant information. Postdlf 02:56, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Actually, all U.S. towns and census-designated places (however small) have articles, and high schools are generally deemed notable. There would be articles on both Shanksville and Columbine anyway. As for this building, I would have voted keep if it was listed in my AIA Guide (which includes 5000+ NYC buildings, including many in the immediate neighborhood of this apt building). I was looking to it as a source, but found nothing on this building to be able to expand the article. I also looked through the NY Times archives (pre-today) and found next to nothing (only real estate sales and such). --Aude (talk) 02:57, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep this apartment building is tall, out side of New York City any tower this size would generally be considered noteable, --Cloveious 04:02, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Buildings are notable on size now? In that case, there's this hotel over in San Jose. Nobody who doesn't live near here or has stayed in it has EVER heard of the building, but it's a solid 35 stories high, and has 2 pools, and 2 tennis courts. Think it's notable? -Amarkov babble 04:06, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
Well geese sorry for having an opinion, but I just went back and read the article, its a hospital too. Besides it's 50 freakin Stories, in my world that is pretty noteable considering the tallest building in Western Canada is the Petro-Canada Centre and that is barely taller then that. --Cloveious 04:14, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
50 stories is about medium for a New York City skyrise. Besides, a building is not notable simply for being big, nor is it for being a hospital. And a sucession of non-notable things does not add up to something notable. -Amarkov babble 04:20, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
Okay if you belive that why don't you go through List of Towers, and List of hospitals and start afd'ing everything --Cloveious 04:23, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
Because the hospitals do not get their own articles. And for the towers, the ones that are famous in connection to a famous event actually ARE famous. If you refer to the 524 East 72nd street crash a couple months from now, or even right now, people will say "Um... what the hell are you talking about?" On the contrary, if you mentioned, say, the Texas School Book Depository, people would know that is where JFK was killed. -Amarkov babble 04:29, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
Oh Snap, your questionable logic has failed! Hospitals have there own articles, Foothills Medical Centre, Brampton Memorial Hospital Campus, Georgetown Hospital, St. Peter's Hospital, Hamilton to name a few, and if you look at List of Towers you can find lots that are far more questionable then this. But what do I know I totally think that Altar candlestick and Altar candle should totally be merged are not noteable, but what do I care Wikipedia is a riot of free opinion and interest and if you want to mock my choice of a keep vote cram it and keep it to yourself. --Cloveious 04:42, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
This should be obvious, but telling people to shut up and just accept your opinion is kinda frowned upon. And for what it's worth, none of the articles you mentioned consist solely of structural information. -Amarkov babble 04:46, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Redirect to Cory Lidle, where all the crash info should be housed, or at worst redirect to the current events article about the crash. Sad event, but Wikipedia is not Wikinews, and this building is just not notable. Tragic is not a synonym for encyclopaedic, but this isn't even about the event, it's about an aspect of the event. No case for a stand alone article at all. GassyGuy 05:05, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Redirect to October 11 plane crash article, as discussed above. Jordan Brown 06:36, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Redirect to October 11 plane crash article or delete outright. It's a New York building that wouldn't have had the slightest notability if a plane hadn't crashed into it. --Calton | Talk 08:31, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep- it is one of the tallest buildings in the world- and is now notable through this accident- i'm sure more info can be added about the building itself. Astrotrain 08:57, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete after redirecting. A non-notable apartment building. --Ghirla -трёп- 09:03, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep like users above.--TheFEARgod (Ч) 10:42, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Now it does merit a place in history. IT is a faous building now. After all, Lee Harvey Oswald, Jack Ruby, John Wilkes Booth, Nathuram Godse,James Earl Ray , among other, all owe their fame to one once defining act of theirs. 202.162.56.16 11:54, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. Duh. Every building in Manhattan that gets struck by an aircraft deserves an article. --Nelson Ricardo 12:26, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep per others above, and Wikipedia is not paper. --KFP (talk | contribs) 13:22, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep media attention makes it notable. --Ed Word 16:45, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep It's 10/11 (ten eleven) crash - direct succession to 9/11. All comments that everybody will forget about this crash are speculations. It's better to keep separate article about building to not bloat main article about crash. Crash article may grow over time and will not fit in 45Kb limit and will have to split. --TAG 17:46, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. I'm so tired of the deletionists and their inability to see that Wikipedia isn't paper. Moncrief 18:03, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. While it is no Taipei 101, the article contains enough information besides that of the crash to justify a wikipedia article. It grew significantly since nomination.--MrFishGo Fish 18:25, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment: The above is pretty factual. diff Whether the information contained is notable enough to retain its own article, I'm not sure, but it's a good size and has unique information (more cites would be good if kept) that would not be necessary in the plane crash article. TransUtopian 18:28, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep (at Belaire Apartments). This building is most likely already on the NYC tour bus schedule. --hydnjo talk 18:46, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep.--User:Tommy23 1000, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep --—Preceding unsigned comment added by Scotto263 (talk • contribs) 21:36, October 12, 2006
  • Keep There's notable inhabitants of the Belaire Apartments -- notable authors and etc. The thing is, the Belaire isn't a primary home for many of the people who own a condo there. --71.200.61.10 03:45, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Temporarily Keep and then Redirect This will forever be the buiding where Lidle died and, possibly, the end of the era of free overflying of Manhattan airspace. However, in the case of the Jan 5, 2002 Tampa plane crash, the Bank of America Tower in Tampa, Florida was crashed into by a stolen Cessna 172 piloted by a high-school student. He was inspired by the September 11 attacks (actual terrorism link + aftermath of 9/11), yet there is NO entry for the building, not even a redirect to 2002 Tampa plane crash. Also, I live in the area and there is nothing special about this building. As for inhabitants, not even 740 Park Avenue has an entry on WP... --Gkklein 06:14, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Skyscrapers tend to last for a long time, they don't go anywhere. 50 stories is enough for me with or without the plane crash.65.81.27.35 08:00, 13 October 2006 (UTC) Note: For those people who can't find this building in an AIA book, you're using the WRONG source. Emporis.com is the world's #1 high-rise database, and of course this building entry existed long before the plane crash: http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=113807 Ok, the building is a mere 18 years old. I think it's more notable than some silly fictional town from a TV series. → R Young {yakłtalk} 08:16, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep It was here for 18 years and will stand who knows for how long. It has hospital, famous people live there, it is big relative to average (non NY) building. It is associated with the plane crash. In my view - all above worth an article.JollyTheRoger 12:02, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, notable enough and no namespace issues. Eliot 14:38, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, Why shouldn't we have an article on a big (and now famous) building? CConrad 16:14, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Notable enough for Redirect There are thousands of buildings in NYC more notable that this one and that are nor in WP. You might want to research and write entries on those. The rule is: if most of what is notable about this building is contained in the accident entry, a Redirect is right way to acknoledge its notability.--Gkklein 17:23, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, there is hardly enough here not on the page about the plane crash to justify a solo article. There are a lot of tall buildings in New York, and a lot of famous people live in tall buildings in New York. Ho-hum. Crunk 18:04, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. Now one of the most famous buildings in the world. --JJay 00:25, 14 October 2006 (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.