Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amir (restaurant)


 * 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 delete.  MBisanz  talk 00:39, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Amir (restaurant)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I couldn't establish that they meet WP:ORG or WP:GNG. Boleyn (talk) 17:31, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Ok, so it's a restaurant. Outside of that, I don't see anything in the way of WP:GNG being met here. RickinBaltimore (talk) 18:44, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep, tentatively pending some general discussion, or merge to a suitable list-article. Note there are more than 40 restaurants in the chain, as can be found by Google map search or by zooming out from the restaurant chain's locations webpage.  And the chain is primarily French-speaking apparently, and coverage of it will be mostly in French language publications which tends to be less easy for us to find and interpret.  I appreciate the nom's implied assertion that they looked for sources, but I expect that we just haven't found sources that do exist.
 * What is notability for restaurants is a big unsettled issue I believe, where I think a clear standard (like the standard allowing high schools where existence is documented) is needed. For example a restaurant chain having 20 or more branches should be presumed notable, I suggest.
 * Note many American restaurants with just one or two branches already have articles; I believe that non-American and especially non-English-speaking chains should have roughly equal standards.  A chain of this size (>40) in the United States would have no problem being accepted as obviously notable.
 * In general the situation of new editors creating articles only to have them deleted by AFD as here, for vague reasons, is bad...it turns off potential good contributors. So there should be leeway given, if this is a new contributor (but I see that is not the case, this was created in 2010 by an editor who eventually was banned, in 2013).
 * Elsewhere (at Talk:List of pizza chains of the United States (where I mention this AFD), I propose a standard that a chain of 10 or more should generally be deemed notable for inclusion as an item on that list. The same reasoning applies here about separate article notability: a chain of more than 40 restaurants as here surely has coverage existing (though not yet presented), and this article should be kept.
 * If the decision were nonetheless going towards deletion, then merger/redirect to a suitable list-article that can include this chain as a list item would be better. That would be List of Canadian restaurant chains, which by the way includes an item with no footnote and just 12 outlets (Vern's Pizza), and an item with 25 outlets supported only by footnote to the chain's own webpage (Mr. Mike's).  Actually merge/redirect to there would be okay by me as a quick resolution, leaving proof of sources until later, when the redirect could be restored to be an article with its edit history intact.
 * Thanks for reading! do  ncr  am  20:22, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. North America1000 21:04, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America1000 21:04, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Quebec-related deletion discussions. North America1000 21:04, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 02:55, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as this is still questionable aside from its apparent local attention. SwisterTwister   talk  05:37, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete I appreciate Doncram's logic, but we can't keep an article because we think there might be sources that we can't find. As of now, searching for sources has turned up nothing significant.  As for inclusion in a list article, I don't think we should include something in a list that isn't notable enough for its own article.  The fact that there's another non-notable restaurant on the list is WP:OTHERSTUFF, but that's neither here nor there because this isn't the appropriate venue to discuss inclusion in the list. --Nick&#8288;—&#8288;Contact/Contribs 06:27, 10 February 2016 (UTC)


 * 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.