Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alumni Chapel (The Hill School)

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. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 00:33, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Alumni Chapel (The Hill School)

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

This building holds no significance; it is not architecturally significant, nor is it historically significant. It gains no significance from its association with The Hill School. I have proposed that this page be deleted before; my prod tag was removed, the person citing that the page has book sources. However, that book source documents, as its point, insignificant things: the vicissitudes of local life and the average person and community efforts of the small town in which its located. Because it was mentioned in a book doesn't mean it's significant. As well, this page was created by a person that splintered the main article, The Hill School, probably seeking to promote the prestige of the institution. He explained his motives as necessary because of the burdensome size of the article; however, the article did not pass WP:SIZESPLIT, and should not have been split. I strongly urge for this article to be either merged, smerged, or deleted from Wikipedia. Peapod21 (talk) 22:14, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2017 June 30. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:26, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 11:43, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 11:43, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 11:43, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. Of the listed references, only one is a reliable third-party source, and that source doesn't seem to actually mention the chapel. The building itself, while a lovely specimen of its type, does not seem to have any particular notability.PohranicniStraze (talk) 01:59, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Zero evidence of independent notability. The chapel at my old school (founded 627 AD) was built earlier this one, and it has never occurred to me that it might be independently notable. Because it isn't. Narky Blert (talk) 23:35, 9 July 2017 (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.