Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pastini Pastaria


 * 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 that this topic is notable. (non-admin closure) (t &#183; c)  buidhe  23:29, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Pastini Pastaria

 * – ( View AfD View log )

local restaurant of no apparent importance. Not a performance venues. Not a historic location. Not a famous chef or owner. At least one ref, #4, is a promotional interview Local reviews only, and, in any medium sized cities, that I think is no longer sufficient. we're not a travel guide or a restaurant guide..  DGG ( talk ) 19:36, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete — non-notable restaurant. Celestina007 (talk) 19:40, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  19:49, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  19:49, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  19:50, 10 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep per GNG. I'm not prepared to drop what I'm doing to save this article in the next couple days, but as someone who has promoted ~20 articles about Portland restaurants recently, I can say there's enough coverage to meet eligibility criteria. Sources easily allow expansion with Description, History, and Reception sections, with details about the openings and closings of specific locations. There are also multiple detailed reviews published by journalistic publications. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 20:50, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Update: I've expanded the History section a bit. The page is up to 17 sources. Haven't even started on the Description (with focus on menu) or Reception sections yet. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 23:17, 10 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete There's zero or at the most 1 (which isn't good enough for GNG) RS that isn't local covering this. SK2242 (talk) 01:59, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.  The Columbian is a daily newspaper for Vancouver, Washington, and Clark County, Washington.    </li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> </ol>There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Pastini Pastaria to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 08:47, 11 January 2021 (UTC)</li></ul>
 * Notability (organizations and companies) says: "The source's audience must also be considered. Evidence of significant coverage by international or national, or at least regional, media is a strong indication of notability. On the other hand, attention solely from local media, or media of limited interest and circulation, is not an indication of notability; at least one regional, statewide, provincial, national, or international source is necessary." Pastini Pastaria is an Oregon-based restaurant chain. The Columbian, a regional daily newspaper for Vancouver, Washington, and Clark County, Washington, reviewed Pastini Pastaria. A second regional source is The Oregonian, which has reviewed Pastini Pastaria multiple times. According to its Wikipedia article, The Oregonian is "the largest newspaper in Oregon and the second largest in the Pacific Northwest by circulation." The restaurant has been reviewed in 2001, 2002, 2004, 2008, 2009, 2015, and 2017. The restaurant chain has received sustained coverage in reliable sources over a period of 16 years, which strongly establishes notability. Cunard (talk) 08:47, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Very helpful, Cunard, thank you. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 15:43, 11 January 2021 (UTC)  FYI, the company has rebranded as Pastini. I'd move the page but I think doing so is discouraged during active deletion discussions. I'll plan to move if the article is kept. --- Another Believer  ( Talk ) 21:07, 11 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep per Cunard—not much more I can say except that there's enough non-routine coverage in sources with wide enough regional scope; certainly the article can be made reasonably long and the sources span a wide period of time. — Bilorv ( talk ) 17:20, 15 January 2021 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.