Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sons of Norway Building (Minneapolis, Minnesota)

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. Black Kite (talk) 08:34, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sons of Norway Building (Minneapolis, Minnesota)

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

The article doesn't assert notability for the building, either for its architecture or for the organization's use of it. According to property tax records, it was built in 1961. It isn't listed in the National Register or as a local historic property. Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 18:54, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It looks to me like a significant sized, possibly Moderne style building, and it is unique as the headquarters building of a major organization. So, while I haven't searched for or found significant coverage, I do expect that documentation about this building exists. --doncram 19:23, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- If you expect that documentation for this building exists, then the burden is on you to provide those sources in a Wikipedia article. I've searched for documentation about it, but this reference from Emporis.com brings up a different building. A search on Emporis for the Calhoun-Isles neighborhood doesn't show anything. By the way, I've been in the neighborhood and I've visited the building, but just to get cash from an ATM in it. It really is an unremarkable office building. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 20:04, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Well i notice that there is some discussion of the building in a google book / news article in approximately 1962 or 1963, covering the Fifth National Bank of something moving in as an early, major tenant. I could be wrong, but I would expect there should be more coverage existing. --do ncr am 20:08, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Note that a comment from Orlady (talk · contribs) appeared here, but it was deleted by Doncram. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 20:04, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, as acknowledged in edit summary and in Talk page posting. If others wish to discuss that, please do discuss at Talk. --do ncr am 20:08, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My !vote and reasoning are visible on the talk page and in the page history. --Orlady (talk) 18:53, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Entirely stupid behavior, frankly, by a long-hateful editor seemingly ever intent on following and poisoning and wreaking mayhem. Way to go, violating your own agreement, by reasonable interpretation. --do ncr am 18:57, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as written - I could not find anything on Google scholar or books about this building. If someone can find and add some sources from "the deep end" of the WWW, and add better information, then I would agree to keep it. However, as currently written and poorly sourced, it is subject to deletion — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bearian (talk • contribs) 20:21, 7 August 2012

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Minnesota-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:17, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:17, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The article contains no assertion of the subject's notability, nor does an internet and Google News Archive search reveal any significant coverage of this building. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 02:47, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Well, the United States Daughters of 1812, National Headquarters is notable. The Texas Federation of Women's Clubs Headquarters is notable. And I am sure a bunch of other Sons and Daughters and Womens organization headquarters are notable. Harumph. But I have looked more now and haven't found much of anything more to add. It is confusing to me that there are lots of Flickr pics and the building seems notable to others, but that there doesn't seem to be much mention of it. Anyhow, if no one else finds anything significant, I don't mind if this article goes. If it does go, I'd prefer for it to be redirected to Sons of Norway (where a pic of the building appears) rather than entirely deleted, as the building does have the appearance of seeming notable and could be searched for by readers. --do ncr am 17:51, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete There simply are notable characteristics, but those alone don't make the entire building itself notable. Dusti^*poke* 23:38, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Sons of Norway which includes a list of Sons of Norway buildings. I have searched and can't find any sources giving this building significant coverage. Unlike the United States Daughters of 1812, National Headquarters and the Texas Federation of Women's Clubs Headquarters mentioned above, this building is not listed on the National Register of Historic Places and does not appear to have received state or local historic landmark status. Cbl62 (talk) 06:38, 10 August 2012 (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.