Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dino'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 Delete. Jreferee (talk) 06:34, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Dino's

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A six-restaurant chain with no references that I can find. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:44, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. DavidLeighEllis (talk) 23:24, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 04:19, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 04:19, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Minnesota-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 04:20, 14 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep. Sources:, , , , , , . - The Bushranger One ping only 01:32, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment. Pretty much every restaurant gets local reviews and passing mentions. That's not enough. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:12, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Most of these are not "passing mentions". Franchise Times is not "local" to MSP. Wikipedia is not paper, we need to stop pretending that we have a size limit and, therefore, have to keep ratcheting up what defines "notability" until every article needs 18 ten-A4-page sources from 19 different geographical regions, each in quadruplicate. - The Bushranger One ping only 01:04, 26 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  D u s t i *Let's talk!* 01:07, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

 
 * Weak Keep Some of the articles do coverage the business and its history in some detail. Seems to be enough to establish notability. The coverage is in substantial regional papers. Candleabracadabra (talk) 04:07, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment. I don't see it in any of the links supplied by Bushranger. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:29, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete Plenty of sources to establish existence. None that I can find to establish notability.-- K orr u ski Talk 12:00, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. The sources from User:The Bushranger are sufficient, in my opinion, though not overwhelming.  The place seems to have hit its prime prior to the internet era, so the sourcing is more challenging.-- Kubigula (talk) 03:23, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L Faraone  23:29, 28 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete Yes, there is prove of their existence. No, there is no proof of notability, not even with the links supplied by Bushranger. The Banner talk 03:09, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - Sources from Bushranger appear to be routine coverage, not an indication of notability. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:49, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Weak keep as I've heard of this chain being from New England before this AfD so I believe that there are likely more uncovered source out there to establish notability. Technical 13 (talk) 18:11, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "I've heard of it" has to be one of the worst reasons to keep an article I've seen. Neutralitytalk 05:49, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. Small amount of coverage shows a Routine, run-of-the-mill chain. Neutralitytalk 05:49, 9 September 2013 (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.