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 keep. JForget 02:17, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

100 Park Avenue Building

[edit]

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

Unremarkable 12 story building. Lacks coverage in 3rd party sources. Google news and book hits limited to mentions of it as an address for the subject of those articles but no indication that this topic might meet notability guidelines. RadioFan (talk) 22:23, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This was once the tallest building in Oklahoma City and was designed by a notable Oklahoma architect, so it's not exactly "unremarkable". A few more book references can be found under the building's original name, the Medical Arts Building; unfortunately, they have very limited previews, but they're out there ([1] [2]). TheCatalyst31 ^{Reaction•Creation} 22:51, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the coverage found by TheCatalyst31. While the nom has decided it's "unremarkable," other writers found it remarkable enough to prompt coverage of it.--Oakshade (talk) 01:42, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm not seeing how those above links demonstrate the notability of this topic. The building is the subject of the first article, which is good, but the second one is about the architect and mentions the building only in passing and in a large list of projects (it would make an excellent reference for an article on Layton or Wells). Notability guidelines insist on "Significant coverage that address the subject directly in detail." So far, only the Harlow's Weekly article meets this criteria. The claim that it was once the tallest building in the city has not been substantiated with a citation to a reliable 3rd party source yet. Are there other names this building might have gone under?--RadioFan (talk) 13:59, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This article is a prime candidate for organic growth. The building is notable not only for the history/architecture of Oklahoma City, but for Art Deco style.172.130.147.237 (talk) 19:34, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep. An adequately well-written and sourced article, notability is the only problem here. This building is remarkable because it was designed by a significant OK architect and is a datapoint in the story of "Deco" style in OK City and in Tulsa. --Lockley (talk) 00:33, 3 February 2010 (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.