Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beachfront Tower Hotel

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. Wizardman 16:58, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Beachfront Tower Hotel

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

Deprodded article on a proposed hotel in Dubai that will most likely never be built. Has only 33 Google hits, and is not notable. Glittering Pillars (talk) 22:02, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Arab Emirates-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 22:35, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of tallest buildings in Dubai. There's no other real content on the page. Perhaps after it's built (or during its building) more information will be created that will prompt the creation of this article, but until then there's no real reason to keep this page. Its notability is limited to that which would be listed on the aforementioned list. --Mpdelbuono (talk)

Redirect a nonexistent entity to a list of existent entities? Seems inappropriate. Glittering Pillars (talk) 04:31, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Given that the entity in question is already listed on that article, I feel that if the article thinks it is worthy of retaining that content, then the redirect is warranted. If the article didn't have that listed, then I could agree with you. --Mpdelbuono (talk) 18:35, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Non-notable building that hasn't been built. Angryapathy (talk) 17:16, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as a building that will probably not be built any time soon. Bearian (talk) 19:47, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or redirect at least. Plans even to build a building can be notable, especially if there should be sources that discuss the cancellation of the project. DGG ( talk ) 15:50, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are no sources for anything. 33 total Google hits. Glittering Pillars (talk) 21:44, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete per WP:CRYSTAL, although I'll note that we have an article on 7 South Dearborn, a Chicago skyscraper proposal that was cancelled nine years ago. --Glenfarclas (talk) 22:41, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 22:47, 12 December 2009 (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.