Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Altitude 25

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 no consensus. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:28, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Altitude 25

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unremarkable residential building, fails WP:NBUILD. No significant coverage in reliable independent sources. Pontificalibus 11:02, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 11:16, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 14:34, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Some coverage of the building - [1][2][3][4][5][6]. Not sure if these are sufficient or strong enough sources, but there may be more. Hzh (talk) 19:24, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

None of them discuss the building in detail except maybe [7] which is mundane local coverage. [8] seems to be a press quote from the developer. The worldarchitecturenews.com site is not an indepenent source, as it invites people to "submit projects and press releases for consideration". --Pontificalibus 19:49, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not leaning one way or the other at the moment to keep or delete. However, I do remember there was some coverage of the building in other non-local publications, the problem is finding them since those may not have been archived online. At the moment it is note-worthy as the second tallest building in Croydon, although there are a number of buildings being built/planned that will be taller. Hzh (talk) 20:57, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep All news sources invite submissions and press releases. There is enough for WP:GNG including the critical piece about the balconies which is obviously independent coverage Atlantic306 (talk) 20:00, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sheldybett (talk) 14:57, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. ___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 16:43, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~SS49~ {talk} 01:16, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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.