Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Erick Schat's Bakkerÿ


 * 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 merge to Bishop, California. (non-admin closure) sst✈(discuss) 04:57, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Erick Schat's Bakkerÿ

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I can't quite see that this bakery is notable. There are secondary sources in the article, but the first two are short newspaper/blog articles, really just notices, and the third one is a brief mention in an article describing a road trip. The first source is pretty good but as I said it's short, and I just don't see that WP:CORPDEPTH is met. I have looked for more sources per WP:BEFORE but although there are many Google hits, all of them are business listings, review websites, and press releases - nothing independent at all. bonadea contributions talk 10:53, 16 November 2015 (UTC)


 * I have a feeling that this article might be just to promote the bakery itself. If anyone wanted to know about the bakery, they could just look at the few sources that do exist. The article is also poorly written and very hard to improve without copying sources directly. This needs to be notable and recognised as something important. wikipedia is not a list of businesses or an advertising platform. I know this may all sound A little to harsh and maybe I am biting too hard, but this should be deleted. Happy_Attack_Dog  ( Throw Me a Bone ) 14:25, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions.  Musa  Talk  11:49, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Happy Attack Dog, it wasn't written to promote. I wrote it after I stopped there on a trip to LegoLand years ago, but I'll let others decide if it should stay or not. Cheers,--kelapstick(on the run) 14:54, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't agree that it is badly or promotionally written - the only issue I have with it is the notability question. The article is more than six years old, and a lot has happened with notability criteria in that time. --bonadea contributions talk 16:30, 16 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment. This is a legitimate tourist attraction in the town of Bishop, covered in The Wall Street Journal as well as repeatedly in the Los Angeles Times .  These articles are brief but there are a bunch of them.  --Arxiloxos (talk) 15:54, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
 * All of those seem to be mentions of the bakery in articles about e.g. places to eat, or places to visit, or about the town of Bishop, rather than articles about the bakery itself. ("Seem to be" because some of it is behind paywalls so I have to go by what I can see.) Maybe there's enough such brief mentions so as to make up for the lack of in-depth articles? --bonadea contributions talk 16:30, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Personally I find this notion that "reviews" are somehow not evidence of notability pretty ridiculous. To me it is obvious that if a journalist has noted this as a place to visit, it is by definition notable by a secondary source.  Yes, it is different if this is just written on a blog or imported from a press release, but if this is in a proper media publication with proper editing policies, that seems to me to be an independent secondary source. JMWt (talk) 21:38, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Absolutely. But if you have a text with very brief reviews (a couple of sentences) of ten or fifteen different places, it's a bit borderline in my opinion. --bonadea contributions talk 22:24, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete, as failing WP:COMPANY (regional/in-passing coverage) but I'd also suggest that the content should be merged to Wikivoyage article about the city, where it can be a valid POI, with its current description copied there. is good enough that it would warrant a mention of the business place at the city's article, too. But I don't feel it's enough to support a stand alone notability.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  05:08, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Merge into Bishop. Appears to fail WP:CORPDEPTH as mentioned above, but has enough coverage to merit a mention on the city page. --Tt(talk/contribs) 22:49, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:35, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. North America1000 02:35, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America1000 02:35, 23 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment – If not independently notable, I support a merge to Bishop, California. North America1000 02:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Merge - I echo the comments above with that this is not obviously independently notable and while I only found some links at Books, News and browsers, it can be mentioned at the community's article if it is noticeably locally known and significant. SwisterTwister   talk  08:12, 23 November 2015 (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.