Deletion of Scottish Rite Cathedral (Pasadena, California)

Comment: I'm not intending on voting in this.  Given that this building is not ''listed'' it doesn't pass the NRHP project notability position, however if one takes a fairly generous position on the meaning of ''non trivial'' and ''independent of the subject'' then there are likely to be sufficient sources to meet the needs of the | General Notability Guideline.  Personally I'd say that rather abuses the notion of notability, but the majority of votes do tend to take a fairly lax position around evidence.  There are a number of aspects of this article, as with many of the similar stub articles, that would benefit from clarification around meaning and accuracy.  The use of the NRHP forms as a source does leave me considering our position on Primary and Secondary sources, the form looks like a primary source to me
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Historic Pasadena building that easily passes  as demonstrated by AbbyKelleyite.  Even eligible for the NHRP
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)