Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prabhupada's Palace of Gold

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 merge to New Vrindaban. Sandstein 10:04, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Prabhupada's Palace of Gold

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

The article is about non-notable architectural object. No sufficient notability besides inclusion in New Vrindavana article. Palace place is not independent publisher. Wikid ^as© 11:49, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - This does have significant coverage from independent reliable sources like the Akron Beacon Journal, Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post and The New York Times which referrs to it as ""America's Taj Mahal." [1][2][3][4] It took only a 3 second g-news search to find these. I know it takes longer to set up an AfD. --Oakshade (talk) 15:35, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: The nomination was based on the principle that this modern work of architecture is not: A work that has been published in the architectural press. eg. the Architects Journal It is not a work by a major recognised architect. It does not contribute to the discourse of architectural theory. It has not won a major national or international prize. eg. the Stirling Prize

Based on this it is not notable as architectural work, as per rationale it has to be merged into New Vrindavan, since it is one and the same place, to avoid confusion. Wikid ^as© 15:56, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of West Virginia-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:12, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:12, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge: Fold it into the New Vrindaban article. The two are largely synonymous anyhow. Brian Powell (talk) 23:41, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with New Vrindaban--Redtigerxyz ^Talk 10:57, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep either on its own, or merge it with the New Vrindaban article. The Palace of Gold is located at New Vrindaban, but it is significant on its own, not just architecturally, but culturally and because of its (perhaps scandalous) history. Geneisner (talk) 11:44, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with New Vrindaban. It is a part of the whole, and the essential facts will fit quite nicely into the New Vrindaban article, as a section. --Bejnar (talk) 05:55, 24 March 2010 (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.