Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gator's Dockside


 * 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. The keep arguments are more convincing(ly supported by evidence). Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:32, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Gator's Dockside

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

no evidence of significance, let alone notability. Local references only--and they are pr or pr-based  DGG ( talk ) 17:56, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:20, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:20, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:20, 14 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom: the article looks like a business listing and the references appear to be native advertising. Simply not notable ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 18:35, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Not notable; advertising and trivial. Wikipedia is not a newspaper. Kierzek (talk) 18:37, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep Additional references added since the article was PRODded support WP:SIGCOV. A regional chain to be sure, but one which has attracted notice in several independent media sources over the years. The article can certainly be improved and expanded, but it no longer is supported solely by pr pieces or only local coverage. Geoff &#124; Who, me? 19:29, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete -- an unremarkable restaurant chain, not meeting WP:CORPDEPTH / WP:NCORP. Reads like a directory listing and / or franchise ad; no value to the project. K.e.coffman (talk) 20:52, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. There's a lot of coverage in gnews search - most of it is routine, but there are also incidents like    and others - they got continuing attention for it, nationwide. Also   , and more. I think there's enough here to pass GNG. Barely, but barely counts. If the article "looks like a business listing" then that's a cleanup issue, and that's not what AfD is for. - The Bushranger One ping only 06:19, 21 November 2017 (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.