Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baden Tower

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 delete. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:39, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Baden Tower

[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)

The article does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NBUILD, it does not have WP:SIGCOV from WP:IS WP:RS The article makes no claim for general notability WP:GNG or historic, social, economic, or architectural importance WP:NBUILD. WP:BEFORE revealed directory style listings and government documents, nothing that meets SIGCOV. // Timothy :: talk 16:56, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. // Timothy :: talk 16:56, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. // Timothy :: talk 16:56, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — like TimothyBlue already stated I too believe this fails to satisfy WP:NBUILD. Celestina007 (talk) 22:35, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete If this is notable than every building that has ever housed an actual business is notable, every street that has ever housed a business is notable, and Wikipedia will become 55% articles on building, 40% articles on streets, and become a sea of unsourced original research, while growing quickly by 1000%.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:51, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Wikipedia actually did once have a rule that any television or radio transmitter tower was "inherently" notable as long as it could be verified as existing. Yes, that's pretty ridiculous, and it's obviously long since been deprecated, but it more or less explains why this article exists — in 2021, however, a transmission tower needs a lot stronger evidence of notability than just cursory verification that it exists, such as some actual context for what might make it historically or socially or culturally significant, and some actual reliable source coverage about it. And guess what, none of that is present, and I can't find any compelling evidence that it's even possible. Bearcat (talk) 19:44, 11 January 2021 (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.