Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Garduño'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   keep. Mojo Hand (talk) 14:26, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Garduño's

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Almost everything among the sources here is a mere local directory entry, or a mention.  DGG ( talk ) 22:32, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep, you've been behind the vast majority of speedy deletion votes on New Mexican restaurants, WP:ITSLOCAL is not a reason for deletion. Being purchased after falling into Chapter 7? being featured in Breaking Bad? being listed as "Best Mexican Restaurant" in Las Vegas, Nevada, consecutively for 17 years? How are any of these "local directories"? And, none of these articles are mentions, the Breaking Bad article even goes into detail of what Garduño's is. In fact, in the words of the Albuquerque Journal, "One of New Mexico’s most famous restaurant chains received some national TV exposure". First sentence. Smile Lee (talk) 22:57, 29 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. I'm really surprised to see an inclusionest recommending this for deletion.  Any restaurant that can garner the best in Vegas for 17 years surely must be notable for that fact alone.  Make it a multi state chain and deletion is really an unreasonable outcome.  And besides the quality of sources is not in and of itself a reason to delete.  The content and what the sources actually say matters. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:06, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep as per Smile Lee and Vegaswikian. DocterCox (talk) 23:44, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - The chain barely meets the standards of WP:Notability as established in WP:CORPDEPTH because one out of all of the sources is coverage about the company. The rest are poor quality because said provided sources all fall under WP:Routine or are WP:Primary. They consist almost exclusively of reviews, listings from travel guides, or from local business directories; not one of the dozen or so other sources are actually about the company. Yes some of the sources provided are unto themselves reliable, the reliability of the source does not connote automatic notability on the subject. While the company is local and local chains can be notable, these other sources are not sufficient to prove its notability, which means there needs to be more because a single GNG-compatible sources is not enough to provide the necessary notability to keep around. It needs more quality sources and if they are not provided it should go. I think that it can be rescued. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 06:26, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nevada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:06, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Mexico-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:07, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:07, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:07, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:GNG due to lack of significant coverage from multiple, reliable sources. Tchaliburton (talk) 03:32, 31 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Weak keep. Enough sources to support that this is a notable (albeit small) chain with some lasting significance in the world of New Mexican food. --Arxiloxos (talk) 15:58, 31 July 2014 (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.