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. — Scientizzle 17:18, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deal-Mendenhall Hall[edit]

No assertion of notability. These pages are simply a copy of the single source given, and the only reason I didn't nominate for speedy was that I wasn't sure if a simple table of info counted as a copyvio. Anywho, delete for zero assertion of notability. Someguy1221 04:33, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete both per nom. The source may be a work of the U.S. government and thus not subject to copyright, but that doesn't mean these private, single-family residences warrant encyclopedia articles. --Metropolitan90 04:39, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As per above comment Corpx 05:57, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Although one option could be to stub, since these are National Register of Historic Places listed properties, I have no objection to deleting these database cut-and-paste substubs. --Dhartung | Talk 07:09, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - both are listed on the National Register of Historic Places. They're part of the Springville, Utah Multiple Property Submission. The MPS document has information about why the district is notable, and it sounds that the Deal and Mendenhall families were locally notable. There are several other historic houses in the city, as shown at List of Registered Historic Places in Utah#Utah_County. I wouldn't have any objections to merging these two articles and writing something about the historic district in general in a different article, though. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 15:37, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment A Multiple Property Submission is not the same thing as an Historic District. A district can include many buildings which are not individually notable. An MPS is for buildings (usually non-adjacent) that are thematically linked in some way (a common event, architectural style, etc.) --Dhartung | Talk 20:12, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I knew that. :-) I guess the question I should have asked, then, is whether we should write a single article to encompass all of the historic resources in the Multiple Property Submission, or whether separate articles are more appropriate. I checked out the Multiple Property Submission document some more, and it looks like they don't mention much at all about the individual buildings. I'm undecided as to whether it's better, in general, to write a single article about multiple-property submissions as opposed to writing one article for each submission. This might be a better topic for discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places rather than in this AFD. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 21:12, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep but clean up... I'm inclined to think things on the NRHP deserve pages, assuming something more informative than the current cut'n'paste can be written. I'd guess that any building that manages to get listed has sources out there in local newspapers or books on historic sites. Pinball22 16:02, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Tentatively, Merge into an article for the group of buildings. from the discussion we don't seem to have a good precedent--it's in the middle between an individual building which is N and a neighborhood which isn't. I think Elkman's suggestion is good, but agree with him that this AfD should be listed at the project site. DGG 02:16, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep: An MPS is a way that thematically linked properties can be evaluated to see if they meet the National Register of Historic Places criteria for inclusion. The MPS itself is not the Register listing. Every building that is nominated for the Register through an MPS really just meets the MPS' criteria, nothing else. The nominations themselves are done on an individual basis (though when the MPS is first developed several properties may be nominated once). Multiple Property Submissions can be and are added to on a continuing basis. Each property that is part of a Multiple Property Submission is listed on the National Register by itself, complete with its own reference number. IvoShandor 20:41, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Perusing the interwebs, I haven't checked any scholarly databases yet, I found a few scant references to a Thomas Deal Mendenhall in Springville as well as some references to the Mendenhall's as an important family there. I am sure a good library in Utah, or Springville itself, would have the National Register nomination form as well as other sources of information including a lot of old and out of print books. A lack of Google information isn't sufficient to delete this particular article. IvoShandor 20:59, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Both are registered historic properties of historic value. The Roe A. and Louise R. Deal House article needs a serious clean-up though. --Oakshade 16:53, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Both articles were copy vios, the site nationalregisterofhistoricplaces.com isn't a government website. I cleaned them up, they are currently stubs but could easily be expanded. IvoShandor 17:41, 11 May 2007 (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.