Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grenfell Tower (2nd nomination)
a number of people above are saying the building is a GNG, and that's certainly true, I didn't deny that. My comment in the nomination was that buildings of this nature wouldn't normally meet GNG, and I don't think Grenfell Tower did prior to the fire, except as part of the wider Lancaster West Estate. But although this does meet the criteria for , there is a key part which is being missed: {{tq|"Presumed" means that significant coverage in reliable sources creates an assumption, not a guarantee, that a subject merits its own article. A more in-depth discussion might conclude that the topic actually should not have a stand-alone article.}} ONEEVENT entities routinely fall into the category of notable subjects which don't merit their own article, but can be discussed sufficiently in the event article. For example, Madeleine McCann certainly satisfies all the GNG criteria, she's one of the most written about people of the last eleven years, but her coverage is subsumed into the event article Disappearance of Madeleine McCann because that it's better for readers and the information is better presented that way. I don't think having this article at Grenfell Tower, when the subject of most interest is the fire, is helpful for readers. Thanks &nbsp;&mdash;&nbsp
— User:Amakuru, 08:01, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:GNG (Wikipedia:Notability)