Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stonewall Jackson Hotel

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. Sr13 06:15, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Stonewall Jackson Hotel

Stonewall Jackson Hotel (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

No assertion of notability; unsourced Gilliam 04:29, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

• Speedy delete Keep and expand. Notability established by Dhartung's recent edit and AfD comments. per nom. No assertion of notability. Danelo 04:39, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete origional research--Sefringle^Talk 05:30, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
• Keep, historic 1924 hotel notably rebuilt in 2000s. Member of National Trust for Historic Preservation Historic Hotels of America.[1] Founding loc. of Gold Star Mothers of North America.[2] Hotel had historic notability (of the 1200+ Google News Archive results, many are from its heyday) and notability is permanent. --Dhartung | Talk 05:51, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete not notable and original reasearch. Oysterguitarist 06:31, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

STRONG KEEP I agree with Dhartung. I don't know where oyster got the idea it is original research but at least now there are sources! Postcard Cathy 07:20, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, the earlier version of the article was pretty sketchy. But the term original research means something specific and in this case it was being misapplied where {{unreferenced}} was meant.--Dhartung | Talk 21:39, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

• Keep, expand, source - I can see that prior to Dhartung's edits, it looked like Original Research (from a strict WP:OR point of view). I think it is worthy of keeping if expanded, or more likely, merging to the article of its home city. Guroadrunner 07:28, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
• Keep due to Dhartung's edits. T Rex | talk 07:41, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
• Keep, If it's a member of the National Trust for Historic Preservation then it has got to be notable. Englishrose 09:47, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
• Keep per Dhartung, as a stub and expand using the available sources. As National Trust site, it is notable. Edison 20:44, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

• Comment For accuracy's sake, anyone can join the National Trust, but the National Trust "Historic Hotels of America", which is a marketing affiliation program, requires National Register listing or eligibility, or significant local notability, for hotels to join. The site is not operated or owned by the National Trust. --Dhartung | Talk 21:38, 16 July 2007 (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.