Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eagle Houston


 * 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. (non-admin closure) Ifnord (talk) 03:42, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Eagle Houston

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No indication of notability to pass WP:NCORP. WP:Run-of-the-mill gay bar with no distinguishing characteristics. News of fire is not notability. Unexplained prod removal. Reywas92Talk 01:52, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2018 December 9.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 02:03, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:GNG. User:Reywas92 has nominated several articles for deletion at once, so now I have to scramble to find sources for multiple subjects, but I believe there's sufficient coverage for an article. There are now several references in the article, and I've not even searched newspaper archives, local or otherwise. Sure, more sources are needed to help flesh out this article, but I believe there's a story to be told here about one of the most popular gay bars in the United States. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 02:16, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I still don't see how additional local news stories about a fire and local paper listings establish notability. None of these pass the "substantive" part of GNG. Reywas92Talk 21:12, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:GNG, and subsequent improvements since this AFD tagging. Personally, I would see its original state as a stub qualification. However, it certainly qualifies now.  Given the title of the nightclub, Wikipedia's Find sources toolbar, and generally other searches via Bing or Google, bring up results for Houston, Texas, "The Eagle has landed", or any number of possibilities.  This is one of those searches where the editor has to know how to filter.  It doesn't hurt to have some knowledge of LGBT publications and how to find them.  This article should be kept. — Maile  (talk) 15:27, 9 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Thsmi002 (talk) 05:57, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. Thsmi002 (talk) 05:57, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. Thsmi002 (talk) 05:57, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Thsmi002 (talk) 05:58, 9 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. Gay bars don't need "distinguishing characteristics" to be notable enough for Wikipedia articles, they just need enough reliable source coverage to clear WP:GNG. I'll grant that Another Believer did once undertake a misguided project of trying to start a single-sourced stub about every single gay bar that got blurbed in one isolated listicle — but they clearly learned from that, because they're trying much harder to source gay bars properly now and I've never been able to identify any serious problems with their work on gay bars since then. Bearcat (talk) 20:52, 10 December 2018 (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.