Talk:55 Public Square

I disagree that it's non-notable. It's a skyscraper in Cleveland, and is located right near many important buildings like Key Tower and the Terminal Tower. 11kowrom 23:07, 6 October 2006 (UTC) [reply ]

Ok, I've sent it to AfD instead of the Prod. Akradecki 04:24, 7 October 2006 (UTC) [reply ]

Several "voters" on the AfD, including myself, suggested that the more notable content of this article be merged to Public Square and this page left as a redirect. I think that this is the best way to preserve relevant information about the building while still setting a precedent that not every skyscraper deserves its own article. Eluchil404 03:57, 14 October 2006 (UTC) [reply ]

I happen to think the building is notable enough to deserve its own article, otherwise I wouldn't have wasted my time expanding it. If there was only a sentence or two of content here, then I would support a merge, but there's more than enough material here to make it a viable article. - EurekaLott 19:07, 14 October 2006 (UTC) [reply ]

I orginally created the article, and I admit i was king of stupid to not do my research and ony submit two lines. However, i don't support a merge and I would like it to be a seperate article. Still, maybe a list of buildings on Public Square could be included in the Public Square article. 11kowrom 00:06, 16 October 2006 (UTC) [reply ]

Although I was the first to propose a merge in the afd, I am now more inclined to keep the articles separated. The current version of this article is about as long as the target of the merge, which would mean that the article about the square would result with having half of its content about a single of the buildings around it, the building not even being the most notable one. Moreover, the merge would make sense only if other articles about buildings around the square are merged into it. At this point, it's probably better to add a summary of this and the other related articles to the article about the square. Tizio, Caio, Sempronio 08:03, 16 October 2006 (UTC) [reply ]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 05:20, 10 November 2007 (UTC) [reply ]