The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Comment. It sounds like it could be NRHP-eligible, but I checked and find the mansion is apparently not individually listed on the National Register of Historic Places, nor is it a contributing building in any NRHP-listed historic district. There are other "Lambert"-related NRHP listings in St. Louis however:
Keep (was "Merge", probably into the
Albert Bond Lambert article.) Each of the articles should link to the others. The mansion sounds substantial; it was significant IMO as the scene that it was; it is not merely a place that Lindberg stayed at, as the deletion nomination suggests. It seems plausible it was the setting where naming "Spirit of St. Louis" might have been proposed/adopted, by the way (tho that is not asserted, it is my speculation). It may not be significant enough as a mansion architecturally or otherwise to justify its own article currently, but if more info comes out or a big real estate sale price is achieved, it could become more clearly individually notable. IMO this merger is obvious as an alternative to deletion, and therefore there is no way this article should be outright deleted. By the way, why do we not have a list of places where George Washington slept? I looked for such a thing recently. That would be the top candidate for a list-article of that type, and I actually think it would be valid; there is substantial discussion (often sarcastic) about the numerosity of his sleepovers. --
Doncram (
talk)
06:36, 14 January 2020 (UTC)reply
Changed to "Keep". Thanks
User:MB for coming up with those sources in your comment below. I can't access
The Atlantic article right now (too many reads by me this month), but its title "The Mansion of Early Lindberg Benefactor Albert Bond" sounds spot on. And you say the other one is more clearly a significant source. Also by the way I have begun an article on the mansion's architect
George W. Hellmuth, who is indeed a noted architect. --
Doncram (
talk)
00:50, 16 January 2020 (UTC)reply
Keep,
this mentions the house, but is paywalled so I can't tell how extensively. There is some kind of ghost story about the house in
this book, but an Amazon reviewer says it is bogus. (I came across another blurb somewhere else that said there were seances held in the house at some point).
Here is a Page-1 New York times article from 1907 reporting an incident at the house (ST. LOUIS, July 29.—Some-Sticks of dynamite in a miner's trunk exploded ... Early this morning the Lambert mansion which he then hired, was damaged by fire.) And it is included in
this book about St. Louis architecture. And
this announcement - 3 story, brick, $45,000, architect. This is enough for me to say Keep.
MB01:42, 16 January 2020 (UTC)reply
Merge to
Albert Bond Lambert. The article does not appear to assert notability and I cannot find enough significant sources; a quick Google search turns up only something from a website named Curbed (
here) and a listing in The Atlantic which is essentially a copypaste of that (
here). I simply do not think that this is notable enough to include as a standalone article, but there is enough information that I think it could be included in the article about Lambert.
NightlyHelper (
talk)
16:56, 21 January 2020 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.