- 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. I wouln't call it A7, rather lack of context. Tone 21:11, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Quake towers (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
In my opinion the article lacks notability. Jayson (talk) 21:34, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy Delete - Article does not indicate notability of the subject. <>Multi-Xfer<> (talk) 00:07, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - They look fun to build, but not at all article worthy, lacking notability. If some proof can be found that these quake towers lead engineers to improve the design of a major building, I'll gladly change my vote. AP1787 (talk) 06:15, 19 September 2009 (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.