This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Cleveland, the scope of which includes Cleveland and the Greater Cleveland Area. If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.ClevelandWikipedia:WikiProject ClevelandTemplate:WikiProject ClevelandCleveland
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skyscrapers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles that relate to skyscrapers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkyscrapersWikipedia:WikiProject SkyscrapersTemplate:WikiProject SkyscrapersSkyscraper
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Slovenia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Slovenia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SloveniaWikipedia:WikiProject SloveniaTemplate:WikiProject SloveniaSlovenia
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. Eluchil40403:57, 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. - EurekaLott19:07, 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. 11kowrom00:06, 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, Sempronio08:03, 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. BetacommandBot05:20, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
