Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Imperial Garden


 * 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  bits and pieces with Middleton, Wisconsin. Individual restaurants such as this one aren't generally notable, but there's no reason a mention can't be placed in a related article, to be spun out into a new one when the restaurant is notable enough. Chase me ladies, I&#39;m the Cavalry (talk) 01:36, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Imperial Garden

 * – ( View AfD View log )

nn unencyclopedic advert Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 12:17, 15 December 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:17, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions.  -- Jclemens-public (talk) 19:19, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wisconsin-related deletion discussions.  -- Jclemens-public (talk) 19:19, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is a new article (created on 14 December 2010) and clearly under construction, albeit by a brand new editor. A brief Google news search reveals one 2008 newspaper article that obliquely mentions the restaurant and a Milwaukee Sentinal review from 1991 ($). That suggests, though not conclusively, that notability is capable of being established using verifiable, third-party sources. I'm for letting these new articles 'cook' just a little before we flush them, if they seem to have any potential. Geoff  Who, me?  19:41, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - The sources only establish existence, not notability. Reviews are not stories but an opinion column of sorts that are not rigorously checked for factual accuracy. The 2008 article you point out is about the Beijing Olympics and not the restaurant. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 02:53, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - I am new to this, so I am not sure if posting here is correct. Let me know. I think winning a magazine award 28 straight years (especially for how many Chinese restaurants are around) qualifies this restaurant as notable, at least here in Wisconsin. For the record, I do not work for the restaurant, I am a customer, but that's it. I was just trying it out as something to create an article on (that I thought met all the criteria) as I learn more about Wikipedia. Feel free to give me tips on how to make the article better. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noflowerchild (talk • contribs) 19:34, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment the Best of Madison is a readers poll and does not establish Notability per WP:Notability. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 20:17, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:18, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Redirect it to Imperial Gardens. Plausible search term.— S Marshall  T/C 22:20, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete I've gone ahead and added a mention of the restaurant to the article about the Madison suburb of Middleton, Wisconsin. Whether it stays there is up to the people who maintain that article.  There's only so much you can say about a locally popular Chinese restaurant.  This one goes "over the top" in its description of items on the menu.  Mandsford 18:57, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete, the place might have a strong reputation in its local area, but notability would require that the place be known to a much wider area. Comment - if the article is kept, it needs grammatical cleanup (of course) and it should be renamed to specify that it's the Imperial Garden in Madison, Wisconsin.  There must be hundreds of Imperial Garden restaurants in the world.  PK  T (alk)  23:03, 1 January 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.