Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mana Bar


 * 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, consensus is pretty clear. NawlinWiki (talk) 22:27, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Mana Bar

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Bar in Brisbane, Australia. Doesn't seem notable to me despite the sources. Listed here mainly because an anon IP keeps tagging the page for speedy deletion; best to have this resolved through discussion. NawlinWiki (talk) 22:03, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:08, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:09, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 15:11, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:11, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. Strong Keep. It seems to have enough coverage in VG sources to stay. Definitely not speedy/prod. — Hellknowz ▎talk 15:34, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I have now added reliable, independent sources for the lead intro paragraph. The notability is established by sources as this being the first bar of its kind in Australia. — Hellknowz ▎talk 09:32, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep - clearly a notable establishment with plenty of reliable sources to back it up. It seems the IP that kept tagging with speedy is doing so in bad faith, and they don't seem to have any established editing history, thus probably not knowing the standards by which an article can stay.  Sounds like WP:IDONTLIKEIT on the IP user's part.  Kudos to NawlinWiki for being civil and bringing it to AfD though. --Teancum (talk) 01:04, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Lacks references which are independent reliable sources. While the article has a number of references, they're generally either directory-type listings or material produced by the bar or its owners (for instance http://www.australiangamer.com/news/2915_yug_and_some_other_guys_are_opening_a_bar_in_brisbane.html is cited twice, but is actually a blog post by one of the bar's founders). Nick-D (talk) 06:56, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment -- How is there a lack of independent reliable sources? Coverage by Game Informer, GamePlanet, Destructoid, Kotaku and Gizmodo easily establish notablity, and are not unreliable sources. --Teancum (talk) 00:35, 17 May 2010 (UTC)


 * This article seems to have come about as a result of this post on the bar's Facebook page made by the bar owners. Nick-D (talk) 08:50, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * As said on the talk page, how the article started doesn't really affect the actual notability of the subject. I would concede that the post may represent a conflict of interest, but there were comments on a neutral tone. Looking at the timestamps, I don't think the post really matters any more. - Zero1328 Talk? 10:41, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - It's a unique establishment, and the first of its kind in Australia. There's been coverage in both VG and local sources. - Zero1328 Talk? 10:41, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - The following is a comment by the anon IP, made on the talk page. I'm copy-pasting it here. - Zero1328 Talk? 01:22, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * In regards to the deletion notice, let's get this page out of here. If The Manabar is noteworthy, every pub in Australia is noteworthy. It doesn't help that it's clearly the people who run the site and their close friends editing and encouraging others to edit the site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.35.122.169 (talk) 00:52, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep Yes, I am a fan of the bar and yes, I did make the page after seeing their facebook post about it. But I don't think this changes its notability and heaps of other people have edited since then.  There are now plenty of independent citations and evidence of mana bar being unique in its position as a gaming bar. Master gopher (talk) 02:18, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Agreed - The circumstances of its creation are irrelevant if it is backed up with reliable, significant coverage, which it has. --Teancum (talk) 11:56, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Ditto. — Hellknowz ▎talk 12:03, 17 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep – Looks like notability is easily established here with reliable sources. –MuZemike 13:08, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. Seems to be notable and covered by multiple gaming news sources.  Will they throw me out because I usually play warriors rather than casters? - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 14:28, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. The article as it now stands is good regardless of where it came from. (Thanks to H3llkn0wz in particular.) The Facebook request that got it started is problem-free. It doesn't ask people to spam, lie or promote, just to create an article, which isn't considered a subversive act by default quite yet. It doesn't matter that fans are editing the article unless they do something untoward, and if they do, problems within an article aren't a reason to delete if the problems can be edited back out again. The way I see it, the people who edit a given article can be divided into those who like its subject, those who dislike its subject, and those who don't really care one way or the other and have little reason to be there unless the article is in itself important in documenting the cosmos. Deeming the first group suspicious and leaving matters to the other two seems like it would create more problems than it solves. Sure, fans might spam or distort. But in the absence of a really effective department of pre-crime, the only way we have of telling whether a given person will is to see him doing so. Keeping an eye on them should be a good idea, but pre-emptive action against hypothetical plans is not. AfDs are always unpleasant, so we should close this one as soon as it's been made clear that deletion isn't going to happen. --Kiz o r  19:42, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep, even if it's not your cup of tea (and it's not mine), this is a notable establishment as shown by the rather extensive coverage of it in the Australian gaming press. Lankiveil (speak to me) 07:24, 20 May 2010 (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.