Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Twisted Croissant

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 13:47, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Twisted Croissant (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Surely this fails WP:RESTAURANTREVIEWS? All coverage is from a single state, this is hardly getting wide-ranging or national coverage. --woodensuperman 12:04, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Have just spotted that there is a ton of these at Category:Bakeries of Oregon. If these were local bands, or local bars, etc., they'd easily fail WP:N, I can't see as this is any different. They seem more suitable for WikiVoyage or something. Maybe we should use this as a test case, and then review the rest. --woodensuperman 12:15, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Further note: Crap. Category:Dive bars in Portland, Oregon. I think the whole Category:Restaurants in Portland, Oregon tree needs to be looked at closely. --woodensuperman 12:19, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Business, and Oregon. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:24, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment given the dissension at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daily Dozen Doughnut Company (2nd nomination), I don't think a "test case" is going to be viable. They'll all need to be considered individually since there's no clear consensus. Star Mississippi 12:39, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks, I don't think I have the commitment or fight, there are loads of these, none with any significant coverage other than what's on the menu! But wow, these seem to be turning Wikipedia into more of a Portland tourist guide than an encyclopedia. --woodensuperman 12:44, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm sorry you feel that way. I'm quite proud of my 50+ Portland restaurant Good articles (with more nominated and planned). If you think none of these entries demonstrate significant coverage, then perhaps you should take another look at notability criteria because clearly many people would disagree with you. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:05, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per GNG (disclaimer: article creator). This is a continuation of Portland restaurant entries mass-nominated for deletion unnecessarily. Like prior attempts to gut coverage of the city's restaurant industry, I have no choice but to assume nominator did not complete a thorough source assessment before jumping to AfD because I very easily found multiple reliable local and regional publications and other industry outlets providing detailed coverage of the business. I've asked the nominator to please post concerns on talk pages before mass-nominating and jumping to AfD. Based on sufficient coverage, this entry should be kept and expanded, not deleted. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:08, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep meets WP:GNG. The person who loves reading (talk) 17:08, 11 June 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.