Deletion of 123 Pleasant Street (2nd nomination)

Comment: I agree that this article does not contain many independent sources, but what it does have seems sufficient enough for an article that is notable under . I believe an appropriate course of action would be to keep the article and tag it with {{local}} until additional independent sources are added
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Places of local interest (WP:LOCAL)

Comment: Why was the Deletion Review closed after only one day and not the five days required by eletion Review?  Who was the Admin who closed the the DR
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Disambiguation (WP:D)

Comment: This current re-do AfD is the product of a flawed eletion Review
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Disambiguation (WP:D)

Comment: per the  that some people seem to be using as a keep (not sure how)?  specifically states that local subjects without enough ''reliable'' source material for a comprehensive article should be merged into the parent locality, if appropriate, or deleted. What's "enough"? The big overarching guideline is found at -''multiple, nontrivial, and reliable'' sources exist on the subject. Only one source of questionable reliability (and questionable triviality, local rag) has been found, so regardless, notability is not satisfied
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Places of local interest (WP:LOCAL||WP:LOCAL||WP:N)

Comment: This looks to satisfy .  It's a major venue in Morgantown.  Could use more sources but it is all still verifiable
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Places of local interest (WP:LOCAL)