Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Purrington's Cat Lounge


 * 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. Salvio giuliano 21:04, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Purrington's Cat Lounge

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

This article fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:GNG. All coverage is local and routine, nothing that indicates any long-term significance. SilverTiger12 (talk) 16:31, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep per GNG (disclaimer: article creator). I strongly disagree. The business is the first of its kind on the West Coast of the United States and among the first in North America, and has inspired the creation of similar cafes. The subject has received in-depth coverage in a variety of publications including major regional newspapers and magazines. Sufficient independent secondary coverage to pass GNG. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 16:33, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
 * It has received essentially routine coverage in local newspapers about its opening, closing, re-opening, and last closing- this is normal stuff to find in the business section. It inspired attempts to establish one other cat cafe (that source mentions it in one sentence, and is itself a single-paragraph blurb). The last two sources are online listicles. Again, none of that indicates any actual significance. SilverTiger12 (talk) 16:58, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Agree to disagree. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 17:00, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep Sources clearly pass GNG. QuicoleJR (talk) 16:50, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep. Nominator is incorrect (maybe it was added since nom) there are several nonlocal sources inlcluding Wine Enthusiast, a Las Vegas weekly, and Yahoo!. In any event The Oregonian is a significant regional newspaper, not a local coffee shop newsletter, which is what the relevant guideline cares about. Ditto for Oregon Public Broadcasting. In other words we don't just reject sources with "Oregon" in the title outright. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:43, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Animal, Companies,  and Oregon. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:47, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

No idea if it should be kept or not, but one of the reasons this kind of articles gets so much resistance is the very poor quality of much of the sources. The first cat café on the West Coast? Uh, no. Presumably the first, and in any case older, was "Cat Town Cafe", opened in Oakland in 2014, as reported by Time Magazine and countless other major national and even international sources. Now there is a cat cafe that truly warrants an article. Fram (talk) 18:29, 29 March 2023 (UTC)


 * So create an entry for Cat Town Cafe, too! --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 18:34, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
 * That was my reaction too. I think it drifts towards keep, but I haven't looked hard enough at the rest of the sources yet. I saw a lot of initial fluff in the article like at the Description section that I tried to clean up. Listing the specific entry fee and food items really came across as WP:INDISCRIMINATE. That kind of stuff makes it harder to wade through the notability question because usually that's covering a lack of notability. Doesn't seem to be the case here, but definitely needing cleanup. KoA (talk) 18:45, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I've had to remove the fact on one coffee shop article that it served hot chocolate and another that it used a brand of oat milk. For an article on a generic coffee shop, you gotta fill it with something... Reywas92Talk 23:03, 29 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep. As a business, Purrington's Cat Lounge needs to meet WP:ORG, and especially WP:AUD: Among the qualifying reliable, independent sources are The Columbian, KGW, Willamette Week, Oregon Business, Wine Enthusiast, The Oregonian, Oregon Public Broadcasting, Northwest Travel Magazine, Time Out, and Las Vegas Weekly. IMHO, this is not even a close call: the article meets both WP:ORG and WP:AUD, more rigorous qualifying standards even than WP:GNG. — Grand&#39;mere Eugene (talk) 19:17, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
 * The number of sources gives a false impression: the vast majority of the actual articles being used as sources are essentially puff pieces from around when the cafe opened (none more than a few paragraphs of basic information, and are a step above press releases), plus local business news about it's closing, re-opening, and re-closing. Indication of long-term significance? No. Just a "notable to locals" cafe. I've seen similar coverage for basically every locally-owned business in my area in the local/regional newspapers, that still does not mean they merit articles. The Las Vegas Weekly is a trivial mention, btw, it absolutely does not count towards SIGCOV or GNG, and WP:NCORP specifically states that "inclusion in lists of similar organizations, particularly in "best of", "top 100", "fastest growing" or similar lists" is trivial coverage, which rules out the Wine Enthusiast, Northwest Travel Magazine, and Time Out mentions. And yes, I did go through and look at each of the sources. SilverTiger12 (talk) 20:05, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep, GNG met. This page continues to merit Wikipedia requirements for inclusion. Randy Kryn (talk) 22:09, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. Basically said it already in other comments, but it's had enough coverage for a now closed business, though I do agree with SilverTiger on it being a bit of a flash in the pan sort of thing that weakens its case with what can be considered trivial coverage. Still needs cleanup and a look at reducing fluff, and that's probably the larger issue with this one than the notability question. KoA (talk) 03:25, 30 March 2023 (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.