Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/101 West Ohio
my issue with the source provided above is that it is basically self-published, though (as above) fact-checked for accuracy by the EPA. But fact-checking, in my opinion, doesn't get us past the notation at the bottom of the page which says, ''"Narrative information in this profile has been provided by West Ohio II LLC., or a representative of this facility. Other building information was verified and submitted to EPA at the time of application."''. I think it's safe to assume it was submitted by the same people. So both the factual stuff and the prose stuff (accepted above as "promotional" in tone) came from the same source - the managers of the subject building. Just not sure that could be considered "independent", even when finally published by someone else. My other concern is that it really isn't notable for being anything other than a building - nothing significant happened there, there has been no particular controversy, there doesn't even seem to be a particularly interesting tenant in the building. While the building wouldn't necessarily |inherit notability from those things, I can't see how notability could be asserted beyond information which would put it squarely within the confines of . There is nothing to make me think this building is any more notable than the hundreds of other buildings in the same city which makes me inclined to cite Wikipedia:Existence ≠ Notability
— [[User: Stalwart111|'''Stalwart111''']] [[User talk:Stalwart111|(talk)]], 02:08, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:INHERIT||WP:NOTDIR (Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions)