Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Heavenly Bodies (strip club)


 * 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 delete. - Mailer Diablo 14:34, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Heavenly Bodies (strip club)
non-notable business, fails WP:CORP, was prod'ed and removed by original author. Gogo Dodo 06:19, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Heavenly Bodies (strip club) is meets wikipedia's criteria for being a notable entity since it has been the subject of numerous articles in the local media. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nathanhubbard (talk • contribs)
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisa_Lipps
 * http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=search&case=/data2/circs/7th/943571.html
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisa_Lipps
 * http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=search&case=/data2/circs/7th/943571.html
 * http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=search&case=/data2/circs/7th/943571.html
 * Keep per Nathanhubbard. --Daniel Olsen 06:47, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment About the list of articles provides by Nathanhubbard, the first two are indeed valid articles. The third is a broken link, but the correct article is, however, it is a four sentence article that says that there was a fire that broke out in 2005 at the club.  The fourth link is a Wikipedia article.  The fifth link is a list to a court case, so really isn't an article.  That leaves three valid articles, does that make qualify it under WP:CORP?  Maybe, maybe not. -- Gogo Dodo 07:05, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Here is another article that discusses the arson angle of the 2005 fire — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nathanhubbard (talk • contribs)
 * Delete, non-notable, unverifiable. None of the sources above is really about the club, they are about a fire, some tax evasion, etc that happen to mention the club in passing. The sources do not verify the information in the article. If the fire is notable (which it isn't) the articles would be The Elk Grove Township Fire of 2005, Michael G. Wellek (famous suspected tax fraudster), etc. Weregerbil 08:58, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Please re-read the articles weregerbil; the first two articles discusses the club very explicitly; you can possibly argue that the arson investigation at the club was notable if you like but $12 million in cash seized by the IRS is pretty notable IMO. user:nathanhubbard 04:29, 19 August 2006 (CDT}
 * Ok, after re-reading I still can't see verification of what the Wikipedia article says. If a tax evasion investigation is notable (I don't think this one is) then there should be an article on that. Weregerbil 10:35, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
 * The article about tax evasion investigation of Wellek clearly verifies the tax evasion investigation and is the topic of the article. Whether the IRS seizing $12 million is "notable" or not, I guess is a matter of opinion! user:nathanhubbard 08:37, 19 August 2006 (CDT}
 * One of the Wikipeidia criteria of whether a company or corporation is notable is whether thatcompany or corporation has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the company itself. Clearly, there are multiple, independents articles about the subject. I guess it comes down to whether those articles are "non-trivial" or not.  user:nathanhubbard 08:38, 19 August 2006 (CDT}
 * Delete per Weregerbil. Nathan, your sources don't actually describe the "business"; they describe tax evasion and a fire.  Additionally, your sources are largely local newspapers; this "business" has not received national or even regional attention.  Neither have the fire or the case of tax evasion.  Srose   (talk)  13:51, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I added some sources that describe the business a little better but I don't agree that something should be excluded from wikipedia just because its a "local" interest. Wikipedia is filled with articles about people and events that are notable but local. user:nathanhubbard 10:35, 19 August 2006 (CDT}
 * Delete —  Per weregerbil, the club itself is not notable. The description could just as easily be of the Bada Bing. JChap2007 18:06, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete -  As the author of this article - I also concur with the posts suggesting deleting this article and the valid points that they make. user:nathanhubbard
 * Delete, fails WP:CORP, WP:NOT a business directory, no multiple non-trivial WP:RS indicating any sort of notability. Possible speedy as a stub which essentially just restates the title. -- Kinu t /c  21:04, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete if there article were about the arson investigation for the club, and if that even were deemed notable, I could see keeping it. But right now, verifiability and notability are both lacking.  No citations.  Can this article now be speedy deleted due to the agreement of the author of the page, nathanhubbard? will381796 22:50, 19 August 2006 (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.