Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Midwest Plaza

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 Keep --JForget 23:14, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Midwest Plaza

Midwest Plaza (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

PROD removed by author, saying "Wikipedia has infinite capacity, it is not cluttering the website. Why should this not have an article. I was going to expand it." Wikipedia may have a large capacity but it is not an indiscriminate collection of information and does have notability criteria - see "Buildings and structures" in WP:NPT#Places; having 20 floors, being the 30th tallest building in Minneapolis and appearing in a list of skyscrapers is not notable. JohnCD (talk) 21:55, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Neutral Can you just add this information in to the Minneapolis area somewhere? Brentoli (talk) 21:58, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

KeepThere are building alot smaller that have articles, why shouent this one? Alaskan assassin (talk) 22:00, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

  • Weak delete, not much of a claim to notability. This was the most extensive coverage I could find. (Note: there are scads of Google Books hits, but all are apparently address listings of companies.) At best, it was 5th tallest in the city when completed. --Dhartung | Talk 22:34, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Minnesota-related deletion discussions. -- Eóin (talk) 22:51, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep - It is the subject of secondary sources that are beyond the scope of "trivial." --Oakshade (talk) 01:36, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep per recent addition of several references by Eóin. -- Rai-me 01:52, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
  • I can't get very excited about this building. Architecture critic Larry Millett's book, AIA Guide to the Twin Cities, doesn't cover this tower. I've been using his book pretty much as a bible for buildings in Minneapolis-St. Paul, so if he doesn't include it, he didn't consider it interesting. Midwest Plaza isn't particularly architecturally notable, and it wasn't designed by a famous architect. (On the other hand, according to Emporis, it was the fictional home of WJM-TV in The Mary Tyler Moore Show.) I guess I'm voting for a weak delete on this one. --Elkman (Elkspeak) 01:53, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep Larry Millett's book is great but it doesn't cover the mundane and ordinary buildings in the Twin Cities. I think this article has weight as a business building rather than on its architectural merits. The article has been expanded greatly and looks nothing like when it was first nominated for deletion. -Eóin (talk) 02:27, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment - do we want to cover "mundane and ordinary buildings"? JohnCD (talk) 10:33, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
I mean buildings that one local architecture critic doesn't consider interesting enough. If an article has "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" then I believe we do "want" to cover them. Eóin (talk) 18:16, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep This building has clearly "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject", as the list of 10 references makes clear. NoIdeaNick (talk) 09:33, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Sounds like it maybe warrants a one-sentence mention over at Mary Tyler Moore Show. Other than that.. what is there to say about this building? The article right now basically reads "yes, it's a building.. someone owns it.. and there are tenants." There is nothing to indicate why an encyclopedia would cover this topic. There are other "list of buildings" websites- Wikipedia isn't mean to be one of them. Friday (talk) 15:23, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep, the 10 references says it all. Cheers. Trance addict - Tiesto - Above and Beyond 20:02, 4 April 2008 (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.