Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William McBrien Building
Serving as the head office of a notable government agency is not a claim of notability that hands a building an automatic inclusion freebie on Wikipedia, if |reliable source coverage ''about the building'' is lacking. But there's only ''one'' reliable source here that's ''about'' the building — the other reliable source is about a ''tangential'' plan to move to ''another'' building while not really talking about ''this'' building at all, and the only other source here is a |primary one — and ''one'' source is ''not'' enough to satisfy . I'm willing to reconsider this ''if'' somebody can pony up ''much'' better sourcing than has been shown here, but nothing present in the article as written is enough
— User:Bearcat, 17:21, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:RS||WP:PRIMARYSOURCES||WP:GNG (Wikipedia:Reliable sources)