Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Red House, Buntingford
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was KEEP. Golbez 22:05, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Red House, Buntingford
Non-notable building. --InShaneee 20:01, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Agreed, delete. -- claviola (talk to me) 20:06, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Merge with Buntingford or keep. Kappa 20:47, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)Keep, listed building. Kappa 06:01, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)- Keep. It's a Grade II Listed Building (buildings of special interest). Other buildings in that group include the BT Tower and Centre Point. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 23:40, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Keep, buildings are Listed because they are notable. James F. (talk) 23:57, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Keep and expand. Heritage listed buildings because of special interest status are notable. Capitalistroadster 01:53, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Keep Listed buildings. DS1953 02:52, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Delete, unless evidence is given for its notability apart from its listing. Listing is not an attempt by the government to provide a useful list of historic buildings; it is to make planning permission harder to achieve when applying to alter such buildings. The Red House is only Grade II listed (the lowest), I believe. To give an idea of the scale of the task Wikipedia is taking on if this is kept, in South Buckinghamshire alone (not a large UK local authority) there are probably about 1000 listed buildings [1], including "2 Milestones at No. 82 flanking gateway, Oxford Road, Denham" and "Milestone 18 miles from London (outside Capswood Business Centre), New Denham", also "No 93a High Street, Burnham" and "Garden wall and entrance of Old Rectory, Rectory Road, Taplow". --RobertG ♬ talk 09:02, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)- Comment While the list isn't intended "to provide a useful list of historic buildings", its actual intent of "[making] planning permission harder to achieve when applying to alter such buildings" involves the compilation of such a list. These are important buildings and if someone wants to write an encyclopedia article about one, so much the better. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 09:10, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Comment Such buildings in my sentence referred to "listed buildings" not "historic buildings". I still think that a built structure is not necessarily notable because it is listed, however in this case on reflection perhaps I did get carried away. Changing vote to neutral. --RobertG ♬ talk 10:35, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- There are ~ 500k Listed Buildings. See, erm, Listed building, and the stats I added a few years ago. James F. (talk) 02:40, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- That will be an issue if and when someone ever programs a bot to enter them all. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 08:04, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Comment While the list isn't intended "to provide a useful list of historic buildings", its actual intent of "[making] planning permission harder to achieve when applying to alter such buildings" involves the compilation of such a list. These are important buildings and if someone wants to write an encyclopedia article about one, so much the better. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 09:10, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Keep From the article Listed building: listed building refers to a building or other structure officially designated as being of special architectural, historical or cultural significance. Sounds like the definition of notable. Dsmdgold 23:47, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)
- This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
