Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pubs of Surry Hills, New South Wales


 * 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 - consensus was that this fails as being a directory or mere collection of travel information.. Shell babelfish 20:02, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Pubs of Surry Hills, New South Wales

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Little more than a list of pubs in an area, with a piece of advertising detailing what happens in each. No indication of why they are notable. Amounts to nothing more than directory listings and fails WP:NOT, WP:NOTE and WP:CORP Nuttah68 16:20, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Wikipedia is not a directory. There are links to similar articles that may also deserve deletion. Realkyhick 16:27, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge with Surry Hills, New South Wales. This is a good article and the Bat and Ball Hotel near the Sydney Cricket Ground is a well-known hotel in Sydney. Capitalistroadster 03:33, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions.   -- Capitalistroadster 03:33, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Article in its current form is directory info, as notability for pubs in Surry Hills is not established Corpx 04:25, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Per Corpx. Twenty Years 11:00, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Capitalistroadster. This is a good example of a spun-out article from a main article, with adequate sourcing and a summary in the main article at the appropriate section.  The article as written is not a directory but discusses pubs in the area in the context of their architectural and historic significance. -- Mattinbgn\talk 02:03, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Mattinbgn. Many of the hotels are listed on the online database at NSW Heritage.--Melburnian 02:36, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment The NSW heritage database may be a better source for this article than the hotel websites used as sources at present. -- Mattinbgn\talk 02:45, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment The NSW heritage database may be a better source for this article than the hotel websites used as sources at present. -- Mattinbgn\talk 02:45, 5 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Merge into Surry Hills, New South Wales. It may be a spin - off but the article does not have enough real content to justify spin-offs and it would be better if it was a more general spin-off, like Gallery of Surry Hills, or Buildings in Surry Hills :: maelgwn - talk 23:03, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete this is nothing but original research, and I seem to recall a policy against that. Each of the references are about individual examples of pubs - there is not a single reference discussing any overall themes about the pubs of surry hills as distinct from any other pubs in Australia. Just because it's verifiable doesn't make it suitable for an article.Garrie 05:26, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I agree that the references need improving and it is at least partially OR. These problems are fixable and not necessarily a reason to delete.  Why does the article need to establish any specific distinction between hotels in Surry Hills and elsewhere in Australia?  If the material is verifiable and would be suitable for inclusion in the main article, surely it is still suitable for inclusion when it has been spun out of that article. For example Court houses in New South Wales are not specifically different from court houses elsewhere in Australia, but they are interesting and relevant enough for an article in their own right.  Even using your criteria of establishing a distinction and theme in the article, the article does that, referring to a range of architectural styles and patronage (diversity is a theme) and discusses the long term trend towards closure and renovation as a result of the gentrification of the area.  While this is common in many parts of the inner cities of Australia, this does not mean that it isn't interesting and relevant in the context of Surry Hills in particular, provided it can be sourced.   -- Mattinbgn\talk 05:44, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. The distinction and theme though is not referenced. If the article is going to be based on the styles, patronage and commercial trends it has to be backed up with references discussing that. At the moment it is disparate references with OR linking them. The references also need to be as geographically specific as the article, otherwise if the trends are at city/state/nation wide the details should be covered at an appropriate level. That is why the article needs to make the distinction as to why these pubs are different to any other in Australia. Nuttah68 16:06, 6 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. Wikipedia is not a directory. Keb25 05:39, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, directory. Dean Wormer 04:53, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete: Why pubs and not fabric shops or ladies boutiques in the area? Because Wikipedia is written by bored male college students. The Wikipedia is not the yellow pages - sorry guys. --Eqdoktor 06:40, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment The article reads nothing like a directory and why not fabric shops? If it is demonstrated that a number of fabric shops in the area have architectural and historic significance and play an important role in the social and cultural life of the suburb, I'm all for inclusion. You fix systemic bias not by deleting content but by encouraging a wider range of contributors and a wider range of contributions. -- Mattinbgn\talk 07:05, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: Your right, it doesn't read like a directory, it reads like a guide book article on pubs in that area - hence we have a problem - Wikipedia is NOT a guidebook. I'm not anti-pubs, but I rather think these articles (the 3 pub guides up for AFD) would be excellent additions to Wikitravel instead of an encyclopedia.--Eqdoktor 07:48, 8 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per Realkyhick Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim  01:34, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOT. --User: (talk) 17:06, 9 September 2007 (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.