Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shut Up and Eat

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.

The result was keep‎ . ✗plicit 03:15, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Shut Up and Eat

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A closed restaurant that only gets coverage in local media as per WP:AUD and fails GNG. There is in fact a restaurant of the same name in New Jersey. https://www.nj.com/food/2023/04/shut-up-and-eat-inside-njs-wackiest-restaurant-with-servers-in-pajamas-and-a-sea-of-kitsch.html LibStar (talk) 02:59, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink and Oregon. AllyD (talk) 06:09, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:39, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per GNG (disclaimer: creator). The article now has approximately 30 sources, ranging from books and major newspapers/magazines (The Oregonian, Portland Monthly), to local publications (Portland Mercury, Portland Tribune, Willamette Week), to industry sites (Eater, The Daily Meal), and other media outlets (Thrillist). I'm satisfied with the amount of independent secondary coverage and I've not yet searched the Oregonian archives. This seems to be yet another nomination submitted before a proper source assessment. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:07, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Some of these sources may come under WP:RESTAURANTREVIEWS. Note Further, the reviews must be published outside of purely local or narrow (highly specialized) interest publications. LibStar (talk) 17:12, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, how many times do we have to go over The Oregonian not being just a local paper? Surely The Oregonian qualifies as a regional or state publication, being the largest newspaper in Oregon and the second largest in the Pacific Northwest by circulation. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:19, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Does this restaurant get any coverage outside of Oregon? It does for a different restaurant in New Jersey. LibStar (talk) 17:21, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not having this discussion again. I gather you understand my position and we're just going to have to agree to disagree. I would encourage you to start a wider discussion at an appropriate venue about WP:AUD and specific sources (specifically The Oregonian) instead of mass tagging for deletion. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 18:06, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Contrary to the claim in the intro, this restaurant meets both WP:GNG and WP:AUD. gidonb (talk) 11:01, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: closure has nothing to do with notability, ever. This article passes all relevant notability criteria. $ɱ$ (talk) 21:10, 26 April 2023 (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.