Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gene Polisseni Center
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
- 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 keep. No one, except the nominator, advocates deletion. (non-admin closure) Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 13:06, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Gene Polisseni Center
- Gene Polisseni Center (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
talk 15:51, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply
]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:32, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:33, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Rochester, NY and hockey programs in Western New York. Devmorgan (talk) 16:44, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply
]
Strike that, after looking around some more, they have officially announced the location of where the arena will be built. So, there's that too. Devmorgan (talk) 16:48, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Sourcing of articles in for proving the notability. Not for proving that something is going to happen hopefully. Better merge this to the article Rochester Institute of Technology then keep it as a stand alone article. talk 17:05, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Disagree. Merging into Rochester Institute of Technology article would not make sense, and would not be in the spirit of that particular article either. Having it's own particular article page makes sense as that is consistent with other college hockey arenas, as well as community hockey rinks as well. If you'd like, I can try to dedicate some more time to expanding on the article with more information as the holidays wrap up here... but I assure you, this project is not a "hopefully going to happen" kind of project. Please don't mistake the lack of a fully expanded article for the lack of reality of the arena. Many pages, of many sports facilities start out with just an initial blurb about them. This has citations as well as the concept rendering already. Devmorgan (talk) 18:39, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Procedural Keep – The nomination doesn't advance any arguments regarding topic notability, and appears to be based upon personal opinion. Northamerica1000(talk) 20:07, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I guess this is just your personal opinion, Northamerica, that you attack the nominator and not come up with arguments why this unbuild building is notable? talk 03:07, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment – I entirely disagree with my !vote above being mis-characterized as an "attack". It is not so whatsoever. Northamerica1000(talk) 10:26, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I guess this is just your personal opinion, Northamerica, that you attack the nominator and not come up with arguments why this unbuild building is notable?
- Keep – The spirit of WP:CRYSTAL is to prevent speculation. Usually talks about events or product announcements. GPC is an actual physical structure to be built in Rochester, NY. Only question could possibly be notability, which I would contend that it is notable, for both local and regional demographics (but, as someone interested in the building creation, I am not exactly impartial). Devmorgan (talk) 15:40, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- It is just as you say it: to be built! Did they start building? Did they announce the start of the building? Do they have enough money to start building? According to the article the answer on all three questions in: NO. In the present economic circumstances, even the start of a project does not guarantee the finishing of it. At the moment, there is only a plan to build with no guarantee of realization. talk 17:49, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- It is just as you say it: to be built! Did they start building? Did they announce the start of the building? Do they have enough money to start building? According to the article the answer on all three questions in: NO. In the present economic circumstances, even the start of a project does not guarantee the finishing of it. At the moment, there is only a plan to build with no guarantee of realization.
- 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.