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 redirect to Stratford Place. MBisanz ^talk 01:03, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

High Commission of Botswana, London[edit]

High Commission of Botswana, London (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)

fails WP:ORG. Embassies are not inherently notable. There is also no bilateral article to redirect to. All this article does is confirm it exists LibStar (talk) 05:15, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:44, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:44, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. Gabe Iglesia (talk) 21:41, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Gabe Iglesia (talk) 21:41, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• DELETE Could find no coverage to establish notability in Google Books search, Lexis Nexis Search, and NewsBank search. Used various search terms and nothing hit. AbstractIllusions (talk) 15:19, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Part of a terrace which is Grade II listed.[1] Maybe should be renamed, as the High Commission itself is not notable, but the building is clearly notable per WP:GEOFEAT. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:30, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

the status of the building is covered in Stratford Place. LibStar (talk) 03:06, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Although that article (and this one) does not mention the history or listed status of this building at all. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:25, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The status of the building as now been added to Stratford Place article. There is now no reason to keep this article. LibStar (talk) 17:30, 3 November 2016 (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.