Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Royal Monceau

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The result of the debate was keep (nomination withdrawn). howcheng [ t • c • w • e ] 22:31, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Royal Monceau

Appears to be a non-notable entry copied from a tourist's guide Snurks 17:16, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

• It appears to be a slightly altered version of http://www.traveltradeint.com/royalmonceau.html. Punkmorten 17:53, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep as a noteworthy hotel. I've done some rewriting for NPOV and added links. The travel industry's gushy prose makes it hard to write an objective article when a historically and architecturally significant building happens to be a hotel. Durova 18:39, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment I put a bit of work into the Hotel del Coronado yesterday and found similar difficulties. The problem seems endemic to the hospitality industry. Durova 04:43, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep per Durova, and lots of google hits. --Interiot 21:12, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep as submitter: it appeared to be an advertisement in its original form, I didn't realize that it had notable history. Snurks 03:39, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
• As the nominator has voted to keep, this is now eligible for a speedy keep. Stifle 00:21, 12 December 2005 (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.