Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grand Hotel Benghazi

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 delete.  Sandstein  09:27, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Grand Hotel Benghazi (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:GNG. found nothing for its current or former name. If someone finds significant coverage in Arabic I'd reconsider. LibStar (talk) 05:14, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Libya-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 06:43, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I searched Lexis (0 hits), Newsbank (0 hits), Ebsco (0 hits), and the Libya Hearald. All I was able to find was this article from the Libya Herald in November 2012 about the planned demolition of the building (I read the full article through a link on a wikipedia blacklisted page, just search and you'll find it, but I couldn't include the link). The image credit also links to this article. Searched all the various names and found nothing. In the end, I guess we should know if a GNG-notable building is still standing or not. And I don't, so probably delete is best. AbstractIllusions (talk) 00:39, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:36, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:36, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. From available scraps of info, this structure has been long-abandoned. With no credited architect found, and with no obviously special features or size or location, and with no notability asserted, this should be deleted. --Lockley (talk) 03:08, 9 June 2017 (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.