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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can . Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:48, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

5 Taian Dao (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

I am aware I may be missing sources through not reading in other languages, but I couldn't find sources to show this building is notable. Has been in CAT:NN for two and a half years. Boleyn (talk) 17:29, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Business, and China. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:36, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Leaning delete. Building is a building. The article links to the List of tallest buildings in China, but this falls far short of qualifying for that list (or even a hypothetical List of tallest buildings in Tianjin). Absent sources that are beyond routine reporting of the construction of any commercial building, this does not, ahem, rise to the requisite level of notability. BD2412 T 18:38, 24 November 2023 (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.