Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Schrafft's (restaurant chain)


 * 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 Speedy/Snow Keep per discussion, and apparently with nominator's acquiescence. Whether to merge is an editorial decision and can be discussed on the article talkpage. Newyorkbrad (talk) 02:13, 23 October 2011 (UTC)'''

Schrafft's (restaurant chain)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Regrettably, I do not think this article can be saved. User:Goodvac delisted the article citing "chain has received a fair amount of coverage", diff How ever, User:Goodvac's search only pulls up one source and, we surely want multiple sourcing and, we sure don't want the article to permanently have the tag, Template:One_source as this would indicate a biased view. Keeping with due diligence, I have also searched for Reliable Sources but, could fine none. Also, see WP:Notability.  Planetary Chaos  Talk 11:59, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge to Schrafft's, which for some reason doesn't mention the restaurants at all. There is a book on the chain, and a substantial listing in The Oxford companion to American food and drink, and probably there are web sites too. All the little old ladies of NYC are rolling over in their graves at the notion that Schrafft's isn't notable. Mangoe (talk) 13:14, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep (or merge per above)(back to Keep again, what with all the new sources found): This is one time that the overwhelming quantity of cultural references, over a long period, absolutely establishes notability. It seems there's only one apparent source with any depth -- and that one apparently not independent of the subject -- but that again I say that the cultural references are enough to establish notability.  The dearth of sources just means it will be difficult to write an extensive article. But the non-independent source is enough for a short article, and there's no reason it can't stay that way until someone digs up a business school case, a chapter on S's in a book on the history of franchising in the US, or whatever.    EEng (talk) 13:37, 21 October 2011 (UTC) P.S. I see now the previous poster in fact found a book chapter just as I predicted.  Given the sources are so small a merge as proposed makes sense.  It can always be split later f material on the restauruants, specifically, grows big enough.


 * MergeI do agree with a merge to Schrafft's. As always, if the "restaurant chain" grows large enough and, it could warrant it's own separate article, it could always be split off later on.  Planetary Chaos  Talk 15:34, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. Merger is acceptable as an editorial matter but there's plenty of sources available here to support the notability of the restaurants.  A little looking turns up sources: first pages of GBooks search produce, for example, .  And then there are copious results at GNews including, for example, this 1974 headline from The New York Times: "Landmark Schrafft's Ends An Era as Genteel Refuge; Rent Is Doubling Favorite of Women"; and this one from 2008: "Streetscapes: Schrafft’s: Midday Havens, Lost to a Faster-Paced City" Those two articles alone would yield enough information to support an article. --Arxiloxos (talk) 16:04, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * NOTE. All sources (except for the book) are from a single source,"nytimes". That was in the original argument above,  Planetary Chaos  Talk 17:15, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Even if that were true, it's not exactly a compelling case for deletion to acknowledge that there are hundreds (or thousands) of articles about this chain in The New York Times plus a full length book plus a detailed entry in the Oxford Companion. In any case, other sources have already been pointed out, and here are some more non-NYT sources:  "Advertising: Schrafft's Gets With It", TIME, October 25, 1968 (about an advertising campaign designed by Andy Warhol); John S. Margolies, "TV--The Next Medium", Art in America, September-October 1969, p. 48 (same); "THE COFFEE BREAK: New Industry Turns Problem into Profits", TIME, Feb. 27, 1956 ("The best-known coffee-break business in the U.S.—and probably the biggest—is operated by Schrafft's East Coast restaurant chain. . . .  Schrafft's now grosses some $4,200,000 a year from coffee-break service, employs 500 waitresses to deliver 20 million cups of coffee and 13 million pastries a year to offices in Manhattan, Philadelphia, Boston and Newark.").  --Arxiloxos (talk) 18:59, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:25, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:25, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank You! for all the sources you (collectively) have found and posted here! As poster of this (first?) attempt at a separate article for Schrafft's (which believe was known better as a restaurant than anything else: Wasn't there a scene in "I Love Lucy" where they went to Schrafft's?) will make every effort to improve the article as soon as possible. Am just coming off post of revised Luchow's (another NY restaurant) article - which was a bit of a strain - having told myself over & over again I wouldn't do it. But am beginning to see how THAT goes. Best Wishes, BruceWHain (talk) 20:46, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

 Keep Merge (See below) This restaurant chain has been discussed in significant, independent reliable sources—"Midday Havens, Lost to a Faster-Paced City" from The New York Times, "A Period of Elegance and Grace - Recalling Fond Memories of the Famous Schrafft's 'restaurants'" from the Syracuse Herald-Journal, "Schrafft's" from The Oxford companion to American food and drink, and most of all, When Everybody Ate at Schrafft's. That an entire book (204 pages) focuses directly on the restaurant chain is a strong testament to notability. In addition there are two citations from From Betty Crocker to feminist food studies that further establish notability:On Schrafft's see "Schrafft's to Expand Restaurant Chain in 1925," The Restaurateur, January 3, 1925: 3–4. For a nostalgic remembrance, see Julie Baumgold's "Schrafft's," New York, December 21–28, 1987: 72–73.The subject sufficiently meets WP:CORP. Goodvac (talk) 22:17, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Nominator, you'd save everyone wasted time by withdrawing the nomiation. It's clear it's a keep now. EEng (talk) 22:28, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I would still say, merge but, was this a waste of time, really? Was sourcing this article a rough deal before before this discussion? Yes. Here's how. I goggled "Schrafft's (restaurant chain),Schrafft's restaurant and Schrafft's" and I only came up with the article, Schrafft's, See, (D. Sourcing search) . All this searching out side the name of Schrafft's Schrafft's (restaurant chain),  and Schrafft's restaurant brought up to the forefront, new sourcing discovery's. That's a good thing! Sure, after I searched for, Andy Warhol on Schrafft's, did I find a slew of sourcing. Is that reasonably expected?. I brought up this nomination because I couldn't find sourcing but hey, if I hadn't of and, going by the plethora of the only sourcing that was found at the time, (NYTimes) that would have been one source, no matter how many times that one source mentioned or ran a story on, Schrafft's restaurant. So, my hat's off for all of this help! Now, I would still say, keep but merge in an attempt to improve and expand Schrafft's after all, the two are the same thing at least. That's what all the sources that I've read say. Dairy Queen is a perfect example. They started out as a company who sold icecream and later, expanded to restaurant chains.  Planetary Chaos  Talk  23:16, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * You have a good point there. I was more concerned with proving the notability of the chain, but now that I understand that the candy company and the restaurant chain are really the same company, I have changed my vote to merge. Goodvac (talk) 18:47, 22 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep - Notability has been established above. The article still needs a lot of work to add that information, but AfD is not for cleanup. - The Bushranger One ping only 02:41, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note I like that, "AfD is not for cleanup" and a little further down, you will run into this, AfDs are not about voting. The outcome of a deletion discussion is determined on the basis of reference to policies and guidelines, not a simple headcount. As per my last comment above, Schrafft's (restaurant chain) and, Schrafft's are the same and should be merged. Yes, I did change my vote on the deletion as there is Notability  Planetary Chaos  Talk 03:06, 22 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Well wadduyaknow, now I'm for merger too. Since they are the same thing, but think maybe the restaurant aspect should get more slant. That Time Magazine article cited in the Schrafft's - not the restaurant -article (about Andy Warhol's ad) says they had 55 locations in '68, that would make the restaurant a lot more important than the other business. (autosigned in wrong place)BruceWHain (talk) 06:42, 22 October 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by BruceWHain (talk • contribs) 06:39, 22 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Nonetheless, I think I have made (or have had made) clear the unquestionalbe state of Schrafft's Restaurants' considerable Notability! (See Above under: "All the little old ladies of NYC are rolling over in their graves at the notion that Schrafft's isn't notable.") BruceWHain (talk) 18:37, 22 October 2011 (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.