Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of tallest buildings in Shreveport

List of tallest buildings in Shreveport

[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)

Per extensive recent consensus on these types of lists. Minimal navigational purpose given that the majority of these are redlinks unlikely to become articles, and the topic of tall buildings in Shreveport as a whole has no significant coverage. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:07, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Lists, and Louisiana. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:07, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment in fact the majority 6/10 already have articles. Jahaza (talk) 04:08, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Pardon me, miscounted. However one was actually a mislink to a Boston corporation rather than to a building in Shreveport, so it's properly 5/10. And two - Louisiana Tower and Hilton Hotel Convention Center (Shreveport) - do not appear to have significant coverage either, so will likely be deleted shortly, which would make it 3/10.

In any case, the main concern is the lack of sourcing for the topic as a whole. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 05:18, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Category:Buildings and structures in Shreveport, Louisiana exist. If a list article was created to list all of the things there, the information in the columns could be merged into it. Dream Focus 05:58, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per (bold mine) building size is not a Wikipedia policy-based criteria and that Wikipedia lists do not require persons, places, things on lists to be individually notable. Per WP:NLIST, "There is no present consensus for how to assess the notability of more complex and cross-categorization lists (such as "Lists of X of Y")", such as this one which is well-organised.
- Wikipedia:SALAT: This list fulfills objective as it is limited in size and topic and is not trivial and is encyclopedic and related to human knowledge
- Wikipedia:LISTPURP #1: This list fulfills requirement because the list structured around a theme and is annotated.
- Wikipedia:LISTCRITERIA: This list fits this criteria because listed items fit its narrow scope and are topically relevant making it encyclopedic, comprehensive (and possibly) complete.
- Wikipedia:NOTDIR#1: This list does not contravene this policy as it is not a loosely associated topic and its entries are relevant because they are associated with or significantly contribute to the list topic.
- Wikipedia:CSC: This list fulfills this criteria explicitly because most or all of the listed items do not warrant independent articles. Djflem (talk) 21:58, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
All of these arguments were advanced at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of tallest buildings in Montgomery, Alabama, which closed as clear consensus to delete in 2020. I don't see the point in individually responding to them again - anyone who wants to see that done can read the previous discussion. Once again none of these arguments addresses the fact that there is clear consensus, developed over the past few years, that "tallest buildings" lists require WP:SIGCOV and must pass WP:LISTN. Interested readers can refer to this search of "tallest buildings" AfDs organized by creation date and see that over the past few years they generally all close as delete or in rare cases merge, especially for minor cities and towns. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:09, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 04:13, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The list topic does not seem to be notable. Delete.Lurking shadow (talk) 09:06, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]