Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Radisson Blu Daugava Hotel


 * 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.  Sandstein  10:07, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Radisson Blu Daugava Hotel

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Not notable enough for an article. See Run-of-the-mill. GloriaJFM (talk) 06:49, 17 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete. As it happens I have stayed in this hotel (August 2019). It's just a hotel, like many many others. I didn't notice anything to suggest that it needed an article.  Athel cb (talk) 09:39, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Latvia-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:05, 17 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep WP:MILL is an essay and so has "no official status, and do[es] not speak for the Wikipedia community". See A;B;C and D. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:03, 17 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment: this is all looking very unsatisfactory. We're keeping all these articles because (1) GloriaJFM got blocked, and (2) WP:MILL is an essay with no mandatory status. Neither of those are great reasons. What actually is the policy on typical run-of-the-mill chain hotels? Does each hotel get its own article? What standards of sources do we require to demonstrate notability? Would we really want articles on every one of the 800-odd Premier Inn hotels in the UK, for example? I'm not really sure of the encyclopedic value of this article, and its fellows. Elemimele (talk) 13:43, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
 * We have lots of articles about hotels and so there's no particular problem with them because WP:MILL is not an accepted policy or guideline. If they are numerous, then that's not a problem either per WP:NOTPAPER which is a policy. And we're not talking about Premier Inn here, we're talking about Radisson Blu which is quite a high-end operation.  This particular hotel was the first business hotel in Riga which is a capital city.  It is easy to find detailed studies of the hotel such as Enhancement of crisis management system in 'Radisson Blu Daugava' hotel.  And, as we don't have a legitimate nomination here and nobody seems to have followed WP:BEFORE this discussion should closed before more trolls turn up to waste our time. Andrew🐉(talk) 21:09, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Oh, no, sorry, I didn't make myself clear. I have no problem with WP having hotels, provided they're notable hotels, and I just want to know what makes a hotel notable. The not-paper argument is also valid: I don't care how many notable hotels we have. Being up-market doesn't automatically confer notability (in fact a budget chain could be notable for being budget). Nor does a hotel automatically inherit notability from its being in a capital city (most of which have large numbers of practical, rather dull, generic hotels). In this particular article, I like the comment that it's the first chain hotel in Latvia, and I like the culture section, but the history section reads like a set of publicity press-releases, and the references are much the same. This is a real risk in hotel articles: that they will sound like write-ups from a review site. Do we have any guidelines on hotel articles, and their notability? Elemimele (talk) 23:17, 17 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete Generic chain hotel with no indication of notability. Reywas92Talk 20:49, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per Reywas92....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 10:24, 18 July 2021 (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.