Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hallo Berlin (2nd nomination)


 * 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) Bejinhan   talks   03:09, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Berlin
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

I'm renominating this article, because it is non enyclopedic and it violates WP:NOT, which steadily says that WP is not a restaurant or touristic guide, it is obviously an ads, it features telephone numbers, address, what is served in its menu, this article is non notable and does not feature sources that inforce this fact. Eduemoni↑talk↓  20:48, 4 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep Agree that the article's style does not fit Wikipedia's policy. But there has been enough coverage about the restaurant in the media to make it notable. But this article would require a good deal of copyediting. &mdash; Finemann (talk) 23:14, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - It is well sourced with citations to reliable, secondary sources as required by WP guidelines. It is yet another article that is a complete mess, but salvageable. I did clean out some of the most egregious WP:Not violations, but it still needs a good copy editing. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 15:18, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 00:54, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 00:54, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 00:54, 6 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep per Jeremy. I don't see what can't be fixed by normal editing. Bearian (talk) 15:56, 6 August 2011 (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.