Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pyongyang Hotel
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is the current revision of this page, as edited by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) at 09:41, 13 February 2022 (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.
Revision as of 09:41, 13 February 2022 by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12))
(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
- 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 delete DRV here we come, eh? We shouldn't be keeping articles based on guesses that they might be about important topics. No verifiable sources were presented showing any kind of importance. Verifiability isn't optional. If any kind of a source can be found, let me know and I'll reconsider. W.marsh 13:55, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No notability whatsoever. Pascal.Tesson 15:48, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Nom has no real idea about this building. Dubious reason for afd --Shuki 19:36, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Hardly, the article itself doen't detail any reasons for notability. If it did then it mght be worth keeping, otherwise I would say delete. michaelCurtis talk+ contributions 20:58, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Information about North Korea is scarce, and there is a good chance that important international meetings will take place at that hotel or have already happened. As well, North Korean official architecture needs to be better documented. I wish nominators of seemingly marginal articles would try to improve the articles rather than nominate them for AfD. TruthbringerToronto 19:48, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete cannot find any information that isn't advertising or a personal review. Articles like the Ryugyong "Hotel" need to be kept because they are notable pieces of NK architecture, this one is apparently just a bog-standard hotel in Pyongyang. Jammo (SM247) 00:45, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as per Jammo (Sm247). No evidence that this is a notable hotel. it's not even regarded as a top hotel in the North Korean official classification according to the article itself. (other NK hotel articles indicate Class A is the top category) Bwithh 06:02, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- This site http://www.kcckp.net/en/tourism/attraction/attract-view.php?1+8 (veeeery slow loading) indicates that the Pyongyang Hotel is in fact classifed as a third-rank hotel Bwithh 06:45, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per TruthbringerToronto. SushiGeek 08:19, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - The name shows the hotel named after the capital of NK. Surely it deserves a place and my guess is the hotel likely being used for some important purposes. The article should be expanded but not deleted. --WinHunter (talk) 11:16, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- You... guess? Is every store/hotel/company/building in Washington or London or Paris with the word "Washington" or "London" or "Paris" in its name likely to have been used for some important purposes too? As I've noted above, this hotel is not even regarded as a first or second rank hotel according to the official NK categorization, and its much smaller than its higher ranked peers too Bwithh 22:33, 25 June 2006 (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.