Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sheraton City Tower

Delete, not notable, or explain why it is notable. Pud 11:01, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)

• Keep: There is precedent for skyscrapers having articles at Tall buildings in London. There are also a number of very active skyscraper-enthusiast groups around the world, so there would be interest in these articles, in my opinion, irregardless of how notable the structure is in general. This article is just a stub: there is bound to be more information that can be added to it (although I don't pretend to know any of it myself); but I have planned to create articles for Australian skyscrapers, and I know that there is a lot of information available on these, even the relatively small ones. Keep it as a valid stub. A skyscraper, unlike a not-particularly-notable person for example, is something that can be know to a very large group of people. I think I'm rambling, but you've got my vote, anyway... TPK 11:38, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)
• I like sky scrapers too. Where i live, however, this would not a notable building. But then I guess that is a POV. Pud 12:12, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)
• Doesn't seem notable to me. Delete this stub unless greatly expanded — Chameleon Main/Talk/Images 13:41, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)
• Delete: I'm for the project and its work, but I don't think this building is really especially remarkable as a tall building. I would also like to point out that "Sheraton City" is present in a number of places, and there are multiple Sheraton City Towers. Geogre 17:32, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. Notability? Do we really want the name and brief description of every large building as part of Wikipedia? Skyler 03:22, Aug 9, 2004 (UTC)
  • I'd say only if they're notable in terms of architectural, cultural or political importance. If an article can do more than just give its height, on the other hand, then it doesn't appear to be significant. 'Delete' unless the article is revised to explain why it is notable. Average Earthman 11:45, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)