Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dante's


 * 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 no consensus.  Sandstein  08:32, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

Dante's

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions. Graywalls (talk) 03:04, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Graywalls (talk) 14:34, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Graywalls (talk) 14:34, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

This is just a relatively popular bar in Portland. It's well known to locals, but I don't feel like it meets our general notability guidelines and 90% of the contents in this article have absolutely nothing to do with the subject. Much of it is about the history building supported with numerous permit records from the building department form matters prior to the business in question opening. Graywalls (talk) 03:00, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Add onto explanation. I checked sources. Overwhelming majority of references are in the Portland Mercury which is a paper known for publishing local events and where it's happening with each print like a calendar. So I don't think those counts as a "source". Ask locals and those familiar with the city will say yes. But you could compare that with going to a smaller town and ask people about a local hot spot. A large proportion will know "the spot" but this doesn't mean its really notable enough to justify a page here. Maybe on the local town wiki. I looked through edit history. Many made by the owner himself. I don't think you'd have to succumb down to pulling up a ton of irrelevant building permits from before the building even existed to try to save the page's existence if there was independently published sources to support notability. Anyways, this is what I searched: https://www.google.com/search?q=%22dante%27s%22+%22portland,+oregon%22&source=lnms&tbm=nws&sa=X

Graywalls (talk) 06:15, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * add #2 these are accounts used for editing. Puppets or recruited by business. These have done most of the contribution that I suspect they are either puppets or employees adding their own page. Ffaillace (proprietor himself), Pspark (single purpose account), Elbuffer(SPA), AndersonC88900(SPA, minor amount)Graywalls (talk) 02:08, 10 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep + Talk:Dante%27s/Archive_1. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 04:10, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * comment (info only). But the two "yes" input in that notability talk lacks any actual discussion. For those not familiar on how consensus vs vote is approached here, you may wish to consult these policy/guideline/nutshell pages consensus and  supplement to consensus guidelines to understand how you reach a position within the purview of our guidelines rather than a completely open ended personal opinion Graywalls (talk) 05:21, 13 March 2019 (UTC).
 * Additionally, "Consensus in many debates and discussions should ideally not be based upon number of votes, but upon policy-related points made by editors." from WP:MEATGraywalls (talk) 08:05, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Yeah, none of this is new to me. I still vote keep. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 19:55, 19 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete. In 2007 there was a brief discussion on the talk page about notability and four people took part. I don’t think that carries any weight now. A fresh look shows that the sources for this article are local news, and the first references isn’t even about Dante’s, which just gets a passing mention. Every city in the world has dozens of clubs that meet the standard of notability shown in this article, but I hope they don’t all end up here. Mccapra (talk) 10:43, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Is there a policy saying that local news sources can't attest to a subject's notability? I've seen this sentiment expressed at AfD before and it confuses me. The Oregonian, Willamette Week, etc. are reliable and independent—the fact that they're based in the same city as this establishment doesn't keep them from satisfying WP:GNG. Note: I'm not saying Dante's has received significant coverage in these sources. It just seems like you're saying, in general, that local sources can't establish notability, which I'd like some clarification about. Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 18:17, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
 * It’s not as clear-cut as that. Notability is certainly more easily established by national press, and if a topic only has links to local press coverage, it’s more likely that the community will question its notability. See WP:AUD.
 * Thanks for the link. I hadn't read this portion of WP:ORG. Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 18:42, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
 * It's not that it has zero presence in greater reaching articles. Even in the local scale, the only somewhat substantial coverage is in the alternative papers. I've checked out the sources referenced and even at the local scale, they were trivial or coincidental such as just happening to be the tenant of a unreinforced masonry building in which a large number of people use. If it was a daycare center there instead, it would be the name of daycare taking place of Dante's. When a handful of employees, or possibly the owner and his puppets are having to "stuff it" with a bunch of building permits, it likely means they're struggling to establish notability. I took those things into account when I nominated this. Both the Willamette Week and Portland Mercury are alternative papers which makes it different from a paper such as Portland Tribune. The coverage of this venue in the Oregonian, as far as I can tell, is trivial. Graywalls (talk) 22:55, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. I can see how the current version of the article does not communicate the significance of the club. It needs work. However, there are in fact numerous references to the club's significance, over a period of 15+ years, in multiple news outlets. Here are some I found. I'll work on incorporating some of these into the article.


 * General significance:
 * "Berbati's Live," Oregonian, 2005. "Ash Street Saloon, Dante's, Satyricon and the Roseland form downtown's hard-rock heart,"
 * "Sound check notes from the Northwest music scene", Oregonian, 2008. Last of a collection of rock clubs from the early 2000s: "Dante's is the last of that batch still standing --and not just surviving but actively thriving." Coverage of its anniversary party, commentary on keys to its success.
 * COVER STORY "The queens of Portland's rock scene", Oregonian, 2006. Dante's noted as especially influential because the booker owns the venue.
 * "Jack London Revue picks up where Jimmy Mak’s left off," Oregonian, 2017. Faillace's ownership of Dante's noted in review of new Portland club. See also Willamette Week coverage from 2016, and similar story from 2015.
 * Oregonian articles frequently quote Faillace as owner of Dante's for his opinion on music acts such as "The Monday Profile: Andre Temkin" (2007).
 * A number of 2019 articles (e.g. KOIN, Portland Tribune highlight Dante's alongside the Crystal Ballroom and Keller Auditorium as examples of the "dozens" of venues potentially affected by proposed seismic regulations.
 * Willamette Week 2012: Dantes' "hallowed pizza window"


 * Significant role in launching career of Storm Large. Reported in publications from Massachusetts to Hawaii, from 2003 to 2017.
 * "TAKE COVER -- IT'S STORM LARGE," Oregonian, 2003
 * "CRAZY FOR MUSIC - Chanteuse Storm Large brings her brash brand of cabaret to SLO Brew on Monday", The [San Luis Obispo] Tribune, 2012: "Frank Faillace, owner of the Portland night club Dante's, persuaded her to return to performing" (and Dante's is where she performed many times over many years)
 * "5 things to know about Storm Large," The Republican, Springfield, Mass. (2017)
 * "The Queen of Dark Cabaret: Storm Large puts on a spellbinding show" West Hawaii Today (2017)


 * The "Karaoke from Hell" band, with its multi-decade run at Dante's, is often referred to as one of Portland's unique entertainment offerings.
 * "In Portland, city of musicians, wannabe musicians and music fanatics . . . Karaoke is king Karaoke: Making dreams come true" Oregonian 2009: "Few places showcase that better than Dante's Karaoke From Hell on Monday nights."
 * "Krazy for karaoke!" Oregonian 2008. "Come Monday night, it's time for Karaoke From Hell, which draws a wild variety of deceptively mild-mannered middle-agers, outrageously attired cross-dressers and everybody in between to take turns singing with a live band onstage at Dante's."


 * Significant to launch of Suicide Girls. Chicago Reader 2004.


 * Conspiracy theorists accuse Portland institutions of child sex trafficking and ritual satanic abuse, The Stranger, 2018.


 * -Pete Forsyth (talk) 19:21, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * comment I haven't checked every one of the sources you mentioned. I have reviewed a handful along with WP:ORG. Happening to be the occupant of one of many unreinforced masonry buildings in Portland in articles about buildings, not the organization. This is a mention in passing. Berbati Being Sold to Owners of Dante's and XV and In Wake of Jimmy Mak's Closure, New Jazz Club Will Open in Basement of Rialto See inherited/inherent notability section. Future Drinking: Is Lonesome's Pizza Coming to Dante's? This is trivial mention in an article about the new happenings of what's opening up where. Graywalls (talk) 03:29, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
 * sorry i'm adding things in multiple sections. I'm working on it in bits as time allows. Chicago Reader The coverage relating to Dante's is minimal and it establishes that it was the venue she frequently used, but: "An organization is not notable merely because a notable person or event was associated with it". Storm interview reads "Tired of the club scene, she moved to Portland to pursue a new career as a chef, but a last minute cancellation in 2002 at the Portland club “Dante’s” turned into a standing Wednesday night engagement for Storm and her new band, The Balls", but again, it's not about Dante's. The one coverage in Willamette Week, an alternative media that is partially or about 50% about Dante's. Graywalls (talk) 08:48, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I want to remind everyone that an article about a business does not have to meet WP:ORG if it meets WP:GNG, and that the whole article does not have to be about an outfit to be significant coverage, sometimes even a phrase can count towards WP:SIGCOV.  But I am leaning delete on this one at this point.E.M.Gregory (talk) 18:10, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm reading WP:ORGCRIT "A company, corporation, organization, group, product, or service is notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject. These criteria, generally, follow the general notability guideline with a stronger emphasis on quality of the sources to prevent gaming of the rules by marketing and public relations professionals. The guideline, among other things, is meant to address some of the common issues with abusing Wikipedia for advertising and promotion. As such, the guideline establishes generally higher requirements for sources that are used to establish notability than for sources that are allowed as acceptable references within an article.". So this appears to mean it's WP:GNG with more rigorous requirements.Graywalls (talk) 19:07, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 * , can you comment?Graywalls (talk) 05:47, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete Routine local coverage of a generic local venue does not meet significant coverage requirements. The city's alt-weeklies naturally have regular articles reviewing bars, restaurants, and nightclubs and mentioning their business changes, but someone calling their staff sexy is not grounds for notability. Are all ten of the city's top pizza slices notable because they were mentioned in the local newspaper that happens to be Oregon's largest? Notability is not inherited from singers/bands that performed there before they went on a reality show. Reywas92Talk 19:43, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:SIGCOV.E.M.Gregory (talk) 11:17, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep This article is describing a place, and has multiple sources (some more reliable than others), but generally still seems notable and worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EggRoll97 (talk • contribs) 15:47, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 01:17, 19 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep. PeteForsyth's survey of coverage combined with E.M.Gregory's reminders about how sourced information is essentially "additive" makes me lean towards keep, even though it's a clearly marginal case. Orgs are different than BLP also- where "people in the news" often hit against BLP1E, there isn't the same bias towards privacy necessary for orgs. tedder (talk) 15:36, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
 * A whole bunch of snippets and trivial coverage in local papers don't stack up together to substitute a in-depth coverage in national or regional papers. I've inquired deeper into the dialogue with above by talking about it on a policy talk page to determine applicability. I feel that there's an agreement that WP:ORG is an additional layer above and beyond WP:GNG as a measure to safeguard against manipulation and exploitation "marketing and public relations professionals" to quote the policy documentation. Additional requirements here aren't for privacy, it's to safeguard against promotional articles. Please see the discussion on this talk Graywalls (talk) 18:22, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I understand you feel that way. You've made it clear by replying to every discussion on this AFD, on the talk page, in the edits, on user talk pages, and so on. tedder (talk) 20:03, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I'd like to see your side of interpret of the combination of those two policies as applied to this article if you happen to differ. Graywalls (talk) 04:28, 21 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Revisiting, I have just looked at each source in the article, which editors have worked on intensely during this discussion. While I continue to maintain that WP:GNG suffice to keep a restaurant/club article, the coverage of Dante's is not even close to meeting either WP:GNG or WP:ORG.E.M.Gregory (talk) 10:14, 22 March 2019 (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.