Talk:Cloyne Court Hotel

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject California, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

Cloyne Court Hotel was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made below rather than here so that this is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was KEEP

Borderline. What do people think? I didn't think this was notable enough for an article, so I merged and redirected it to University of California, Berkeley. It was summarily bounced back by User:Jiang with the edit comment "(Housing - rm section; single co-op does not deserve special mention; maybe deserve article since on natl register of historic places?)" But this is not an article about a building, it is an article about a housing unit and its role in the culture of a university. If it's not worth mentioning in the article about the university, is it worth its own article? Remove the university-related material and you have a substub about a borderline-notable building. Dpbsmith (talk) 16:08, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC) P. S. Do take a peek at the Original version.

~~Delete~~. I think the original red and blue links must spell something in Morse code, but I'm too apathetic to find out. Noisy | Talk 17:12, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC) Change to neutral, having read the link from Jiang. I think that there could be the basis for an article, here. Noisy | Talk 18:56, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Delete; either that or I'll put up an article on how I pay my mortgage and (very occasionally) clean house. — Bill 17:45, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Delete: Not sufficiently notable. The housing arrangement and building are both of insufficient note Gurdonark 17:57, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Comment: #92001718 on the National Register of Historic Places. Info on its history can be found here. Other buildings have articles, eg, Cory Hall. If this is to be kept, the university-related material is relevant but it needs text on what it was before it became a co-op. --Jia ng 18:19, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Comment. Note: this is not an argument for deletion. But it does bear on the question of the degree of notability conferred by being listed in the National Register of Historic Places. The total number of listings is about 78,000; see National Register of Historic Places Searches are available here: http://www.nr.nps.gov/nrloc1.htm I searched on Berkeley, CA. Cloyne Court Hotel is indeed listed, dated 1992-12-24. The total number of listings in Berkeley, CA is 56. Dpbsmith (talk) 23:49, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Neutral: I suspect that there is potential to write a worthwhile article about this building, but this is not yet it. -- Jmabel | Talk 03:10, Oct 30, 2004 (UTC)
Delete. Not notable. The National Register is too broad for our usage. --Improv 13:35, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Keep and expand, there's probably room for a article here with a different focus. --Goobergunch 21:24, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Seems like there is potential, keep —siro χ o 08:36, Oct 31, 2004 (UTC)
National Register is reason enough to keep it, if someone could please add that to the article ... - David Gerard 12:25, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Keep. Expand. On the National Register of Historic Places, therefore notable. Stub is decent. — Gwalla | Talk 23:34, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Keep. Expand a bit. This is a notable building by a distinguished architect (as UC's primary architect, Howard is at least regionally famous) on the National Register. It has also played, in its current role as a student co-op, a social role in the university community. --Calton 08:07, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- In looking at the Berkeley page, it does seem to be miscategorized there. If a Notable Buildings subsection pops up, put it there. Maybe link to the UC Berkeley page? --Calton 08:10, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Keep. What is gained by omitting this article? Lack of notability is not enough; if the subject is even slightly notable and the accuracy is not in dispute I don't see why it should be deleted. Plus, it makes the UC Berkeley page lopsided to merge this in there. ~leif ☺ _HELO 10:41, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

End archived discussion -- Graham ☺ | Talk 13:30, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] New Discussion Section

Good grief, it looks like I'll have to take a stab at rewriting this -- I recognized the source of information for most of that history article linked above: me. I was the editor of the house newsletter that published the original article back in 1984.

Trust, there's enough meat for at least a short entry, once I get around to digging up my material from 1984. --Calton 05:09, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)