Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Architecture

WP:DSBUILDINGWP:DSBUILDING

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Architecture, buildings, construction, city planning and public spaces. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Architecture|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Architecture, buildings, construction, city planning and public spaces. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Architecture/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Architecture

David Lee Hoffman

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

I do see a few sources about him, but they almost all seem to focus on his research facility, "The Last Resort." Several blogs pop up and some others about him, but there isn't a whole lot else. I'm seeking comment for if we think the person alone merits the notability he has in relation to "The Last Resort" or if this person is not notable, and is only receiving coverage for one event or inheriting it from the Last Resort. aaronneallucas (talk) 03:10, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and United States of America. aaronneallucas (talk) 03:10, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Architecture, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:32, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Before deleting, sources should be checked in accordance with WP:BEFORE. I searched for information about him and there are quite a lot of mentions. Including in such major media as Business Insider https://www.businessinsider.com/tour-david-hoffmans-sustainable-home-before-its-demolished-2012-7Nagirakitan (talk) 15:01, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Nagirakitan As I mentioned, I did check for sources about him before nomination. The question is whether these sources are more about his home than the man himself, or if he is only notable for this one topic and therefore may not deserve an article under the GNG. aaronneallucas (talk) 17:51, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Imperial Stele Inscriptions of the Pacification of Tibet

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

This is of questionable notability and it does not appear backed up with WP:RS. Amigao (talk) 20:35, 4 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, History, Military, and China. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:43, 4 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Garret Cord Werner

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

Fails WP:NCORP. Cited sources are either promotional/unreliable or briefly discuss this obscure interior design firm. Gheus (talk) 10:03, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Companies, Canada, and Washington. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:51, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Same as the other one, coverage seems to mostly fail WP:AUD. I'm not seeing any notability here. Alpha3031 (t • c) 21:25, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. The article is about an architecture and interior design practice with projects in the United States and Canada. In independent sources the firm is discussed mainly through coverage of specific completed work, including custom houses, multi unit residential projects and renovations of historically significant properties, rather than in general business reporting.

Over a number of years these projects have been written up in independent design and property publications as full project features, not just brief mentions. For this type of practice, coverage of built work is often the main way independent sources address the subject. I have added a couple of additional independent sources to the article to reflect this more clearly.

When I created the article I based my judgement on wiki policy that this kind of firm is less likely to receive sustained general coverage and more likely to be known through notable projects, in the same way that law firms may be covered through significant cases or academics through their h index and peer reviewed work. I still think this is the situation here, and I first learned about the company while reading about a historic renovation project that caught my attention. I also think there are a few good articles about the company that provide significant coverage. I have shared my view and I am happy to leave the final decision to other editors.

[1][2][3] Nullius Inverba 2 (talk) 22:47, 4 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Totally disagree with WP:AUD assessment above as two countries make it more than just regional. There is also a source in Chinese: https://vancouverboulevard.com/2020/03/livable-luxury-%E5%AE%9C%E5%B1%85%E2%80%A2%E5%A5%A2%E8%8F%AF/ Nagirakitan (talk) 12:30, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Convection door

AfDs for this article:

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

Repeatinng the nomination (and I support it per first nom: undue advert). The previous one was procedurally closed due to somee editing mess --Altenmann >talk 18:15, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The original nomination page cites notability / errors in references and not an "undue advert" - the above statement is false. I checked the article when it was originally nominated, and corrected the referencing and format issues for which it was nominated. The article has passed review months ago and has served the community since may 2024. While it may be low importance, it is hardly an advert. The door type is a recent innovation and obviously not widespread, however as a concept it represents useful grassroots innovation and has been taking hold in sustainable construction during past several years. As a new concept, its function has been frequently misunderstood as ventilation, while in fact it is primarily heating, with ventilation as secondary benefit. (Indeed, for ventilation, the well established transom door is just fine.) I have been asked about it and so have been many builders by their clients, as designers increasingly include the door in their blueprints. Convection door on wikipedia may be a niche topic, but it bears practical meaning and usefulness to both professionals and clients in the construction field. --Architectsmag (talk) 19:59, 1 December 2025 (UTC) — Architectsmag (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. Blocked as a sock Emk9 (talk) 04:09, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Agree with User:Architectsmag. These have been adopted in many projects by now and there are a fair few houses utilising these already. The convection door's function is often misunderstood as ventilation/cooling and I found myself explaining the concept more than once. I find particularly useful the diagram on this page. --Archiwoman (talk) 21:00, 1 December 2025 (UTC) — Archiwoman (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. Blocked as a sock Emk9 (talk) 04:09, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture and Australia. I am bad at usernames (talk · contribs) 18:32, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as above. --Killviconiborki (talk) 14:25, 2 December 2025 (UTC) [reply]
Killviconiborki, the keeps have now been blocked as socks. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 04:18, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. Wikipedia is not an advertising platform for Lev. Above arguments to keep are not policy based and are just WP:USEFUL. duffbeerforme
Keep - as per previous Keep comments, this is a relatively new concept. Online citations are limited. However it is a legitimate topic. I propose to keep the article, and possibly revisit it at a later date. User:Duffbeerforme has for some reason tagged other two related, yet especially well referenced articles (some 30 citations each) for NOTABILITY and COI, so I would treat his recommendation as potentially biased and COI in themselves: The architect in question is a known traditionalist, and as such exposed to certain ideological pushback. Let's keep Wikipedia neutral please, avoiding stating opinions as facts, etc. --Comunitessa (talk) 00:37, 3 December 2025 (UTC)— Comunitessa (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. Blocked as a sock Emk9 (talk) 04:09, 3 December 2025 (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/2025 December 3. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:10, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to its inventor Jiri Lev and add a sentence there, as a possible WP:ATD. There is SIGCOV in one source in the Convection door, but it is likely unreliable (BUILD appears more like a blog than a magazine). Though that biography is of questionable notability, so a delete result wouldn't be objectionable. Katzrockso (talk) 07:39, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not notable and I don't think this will be a useful redirect term. MelbourneIdentity (talk) 23:55, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fukinoto Hall

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

A small concert hall does not, by itself, meet the GNG or the notability requirements of WP:NBUILD. Htanaungg (talk) 09:35, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. Htanaungg (talk) 09:35, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:54, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:33, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Fade258 (talk) 10:01, 4 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The article talks about the number of seats, good acoustics and what style of music this hall is good for, but this is not enough to talk about the notability according to the criteria WP:NBUILD Nagirakitan (talk) 13:47, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Architecture Proposed deletions

CCG Profiles (via WP:PROD on 7 September 2023)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Architecture

Architecture

David Lee Hoffman

Imperial Stele Inscriptions of the Pacification of Tibet

Garret Cord Werner

Convection door

Fukinoto Hall

Architecture Proposed deletions

Categories

Requested moves

See also

Transcluded pages

Other pages