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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 11:19, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ProjectNOW (Sudbury)

[edit]

[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)

Article about an unsuccessful and abandoned architectural redevelopment proposal, not establishing a compelling reason why it would pass the ten year test. The footnoting here is split about 50/50 between primary sources that aren't support for notability at all and purely local media coverage not satisfying WP:CORPDEPTH, and there isn't really an obvious reason being given here why it would have enough significance as a proposal to outweigh its failure to become a reality. At best, it warrants a couple of lines in Sudbury Community Arena, but there's no compelling basis for a standalone article as a separate topic from that. Bearcat (talk) 22:14, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture and Ontario. Bearcat (talk) 22:14, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:46, 6 May 2022 (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.