Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/St. Mungo's Church, Balerno

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. JForget 23:16, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

St. Mungo's Church, Balerno

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

Run-of-the-mill church that appears to fail the notability guidelines. The only at-all-substantive independent source I'm able to find is this, which appears to be part of an exhaustive treatment of every Episcopal church in Scotland, which can't all be notable. Deor (talk) 14:26, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. —Deor (talk) 18:42, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete non-notable (in the sense of receiving coverage on more than a local basis), with an article dating from the days that Wikipedia was taking all comers. Wikipedia is not a webhost. Mandsford (talk) 18:55, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 22:52, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No clear claim to notability. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 23:48, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Although info is sparse, the building is categorized as a heritage site perhaps as the design is an early work of Scotland's premier architect. Category B listing would seem to meet notability threshold as it is defined as: "buildings of regional or more than local importance, or major examples of some particular period, style or building type which may have been altered" Canuckle (talk) 06:54, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that when I was researching the nomination; but since there are ~25,000 category B listed buildings in Scotland, I didn't (and don't) think that the listing by itself establishes notability. Deor (talk) 11:06, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:02, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete fails WP:ORG LibStar (talk) 01:29, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not notable. Netalarmtalk 06:01, 14 September 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.