This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Architecture, buildings, construction, city planning and public spaces. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

1. and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Architecture|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Architecture, buildings, construction, city planning and public spaces. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

• WikiProject Deletion sorting/Architecture/archive

Jean Boudriot (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Lacking in real sources for WP:BIO, and no reviews that I can find for his book, Le vaisseau de 74 canons, for WP:AUTHOR. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:40, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Architecture, Archaeology, and France. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:19, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Juan Xavier House (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Mr. Xavier's home does not inherit notability from him. I have been able to find no source that discusses Mr. Xavier or his home other than in passing mention. Please see Talk:Juan Xavier House Oona Wikiwalker (talk) 12:09, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 March 4. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 12:21, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture and Arizona. Shellwood (talk) 12:43, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Altadena Community Church (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

As was the case with St. Mark's Episcopal Church, this is a local church with no notability outside of its association with a single event; as such, I don't believe that the reporting on this church's destruction will be enough to support an article in the long term. Sources 3–13, 15, 16, and 18 are purely local articles of WP:ROTM events at the church that provide no notability at all. If the argument were to be made that these sources provide WP:SIGCOV, then nearly every church in the US may as well be notable. Source 1 is an NYT article that mentions the church. Source 2 is an article from a religious organization that reports exclusively on matters that concern its churches and as such cannot be considered an independent source. Source 14 is an LA Times article about the congregations resilience, 17 is a Time article which is basically the same thing, 19 is a Deseret article reporting that the church burned down, while 20 and 21 are similar. The community can decide if these sources are enough to provide long-term notability. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (talk) 23:03, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Christianity, and California. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 00:17, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Eaton Fire#Stuctures destroyed: While I think the coverage in the New York Times and LA Times represents sufficient WP:SIGCOV in independent, reliable sources, I also think the WP:NOPAGE test of WP:GNG is not met since this is clearly a WP:1E situation. As a result, I recommend redirecting to the list of structures destroyed by the Eaton fire. This will preserve the page history should additional SIGCOV unrelated to the fire emerge for a GNG pass as a standalone page. Dclemens1971 (talk) 18:10, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 03:32, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - The church has news articles available long before the fire destroyed it, and the church is not simply mentioned in passing in those articles. Z. Patterson (talk) 04:26, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Every one of those are entirely local WP:ROTM sources about community events. As I stated in the nomination I don’t believe these provide notability as every single church in the US probably has similar newspaper histories. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (talk) 16:31, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @AllTheUsernamesAreInUse: I see now. In that case, redirect to Eaton Fire#Structures destroyed, and possibly discuss the church there. Z. Patterson (talk) 21:42, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Z. Patterson:

University of the Witwatersrand School of Architecture & Planning (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I don't see why this school of a university needs its own article. All the sources from the university's website, so basically it's repeating information easily found on the web. It needs third party coverage which is lacking. Fails WP:ORG LibStar (talk) 04:10, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education and South Africa. LibStar (talk) 04:10, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:20, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. LibStar (talk) 10:49, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@LibStar, it sounds like you're judging the article on the basis of its current version, which goes against Wikipedia:Notability#Article content does not determine notability. Did you consider Wikipedia:Merging it to the main university article? WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:52, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Are there third party sources out there that meet WP:ORG? LibStar (talk) 00:06, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I searched [Witwatersrand "School of Architecture & Planning" -wikipedia] in google news and it didn't reveal much useful. Google books is full of 1 line mentions. LibStar (talk) 00:47, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Is there any support for a Merge and what would be the target article?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:12, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge. Largely agree with nom. A cursory search for sources reveals nothing nearing making a separate article for this division of the university. Not too different from the architecture faculties of other similar universities in Australia.  GuardianH  19:40, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• CCG Profiles (via WP:PROD on 7 September 2023)

The following pages are transcluded here following from relationships among WikiProjects

• Deletion sorting: Visual Arts (WP:Visual arts is a descendant of WP:Arts)

• Music-related deletions
• Film and TV-related deletions
• Category:AfD debates (Fiction and the arts)