Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gurajada Kalakshetram

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 06:25, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Gurajada Kalakshetram (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Failing WP:GEOFEAT and WP:GNG Arthistorian1977 (talk) 15:51, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 16:43, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

i all ready mentioned a reputed national paper source and government website source if still its not correct u may can further proceed its not a imaginary article you may can google it even i given source of google location all so Jeevan naidu (talk) 19:21, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Just mentioning is not enough. Per WP:GEOFEAT - Buildings, including private residences and commercial developments may be notable as a result of their historic, social, economic, or architectural importance, but they require significant coverage by reliable, third-party sources to establish notability, which I don't see in this case. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 19:33, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Non notable building. Fails WP:GEOFEAT and WP:GNG Hagennos (talk) 01:39, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

these all are news about this mentioned article on reputed news papers http://www.newindianexpress.com/states/andhra-pradesh/2017/jan/17/gurajada-kalakshetram-renovation-works-to-be-completed-by-march-1560446.html https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/visakhapatnam/new-vuda-vc-to-fast-track-projects/articleshow/58582286.cms http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Visakhapatnam/vuda-to-organise-nineday-childrens-day-celebrations/article2597458.ece http://www.thehansindia.com/posts/index/category/2016-02-12/VUDA-Children-Arena-by-Ugadi/206694 https://www.yovizag.com/visakhapatnam-open-air-auditorium-gurajada-kalakshetram-reopens-brand-new/ http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Visakhapatnam/gurajada-kalakshetram-to-get-facelift/article8402568.ece http://www.newindianexpress.com/states/andhra-pradesh/2017/jan/17/gurajada-kalakshetram-renovation-works-to-be-completed-by-march-1560446.html

and its one of the notable auditorium open auditorium in Visakhapatnam City ... its owned by government urban development authority http://www.vuda.gov.in/ i given source for this all so . how can u simply mentioned its non notable or not a significant building . by the way gradually we may can develop this article. Jeevan naidu (talk) 04:09, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to review the criteria for WP:GEOFEAT. It does not fall under any of the notability guidelines. Just being owned by the government and having mentions of events or renovations in media does not establish notability. Hagennos (talk) 05:11, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:24, 13 January 2018 (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.