Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Schwa (restaurant)


 * 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. Spartaz Humbug! 19:23, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Schwa (restaurant)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Since April, the notability of this article has been called into question. Other than the restaurant's website, there's only one source listed and this doesn't even show the restaurant to be notable in itself, only that it served as the birthday location for Charlie Trotter. — Æµ§œš¹  [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi] 16:38, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep The article is crappy, but the restaurant seemst o be notable . ChildofMidnight (talk) 17:35, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * delete - one of the basics is that an article has to assert the notability of its subject. "It exists" isn't a reason to include it on wikipedia.   Dmz5  *Edits**Talk* 22:24, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Restaurants are a tricky thing in terms of notability. Almost any decent restaurant should be able to get itself mentioned by one of the food critics of one of the local newspapers every couple of years.  Does this alone establish notability?  The problem is that restaurants come and go.  I see Schw in my 2006/7 and 2008/9 Zagats.  It is not in my 2000 Zagats.  Is this restaurant mentioned in tour books about the city.  I think that is probably were encyclopedic merit would be established.  Alternatively, has any pop culture relevance been established.  I.E., has a major movie ever had a scene that has been filmed at the restaurant.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 16:11, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * This also demonstrates a fine line on AfD. The article doesn't assert notability.  Might the place be notable?  Sure.  Can we find sources that demonstrate its notability?  At the moment, let us say no.  So, do we just leave the article in the hopes that maybe it achieves notability via some kind of news coverage in the future?  That's the constant flip side of the "let's leave it be and improve it" argument.  Some things can't be improved because the sources simply aren't there.   Dmz5  *Edits**Talk* 00:45, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * For those who might be in the keep-it-to-improve-it-later camp, the article can always be remade when notability is established. — Æµ§œš¹  [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]  01:16, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Write ups in Zaggat or local reviews are not indications of notability. But extensive write ups like this one in the International Herald Tribune and the substantial coverage in major Chicago papers clearly indicates that this is a notable restaurant. We don't delete things because people can't be bothered to make improvements. It's notable. It's an elite restaurant serving "elaborate multicourse menus of dishes such as parsnip custard with ice-wine vinegar caramel, candied sweetbreads and a lavender lecithin bubble. (It's a dessert.)" to people like "Charlie Trotter, Ferran Adrià, Heston Blumenthal and a raft of other chefs." There's also this write up about the chef, this mention in the Independent as one of the most innovative restaurants around . That's why I linked to a search above with lots of substantial coverage in reliable sources . ChildofMidnight (talk) 05:09, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I will admit that the links you provide establish notability. However, I do maintain that the article does not even assert notability for its subject, let alone provide citations and the like.  A reader shouldn't have to go into an archived AfD to find this info.  Somebody should be helpful and add it.  Just . . . not me.  Sorry! Dmz5  *Edits**Talk* 06:01, 20 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep I am not swayed so much by the ancillary mention in the Times, but the independent mention makes this restaurant notable.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 00:38, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete, really just for the same reasons as Dmz5. I'll agree this is a very, very, fine line. Can always be recreated if the need arises. Spongefrog,  (I am a flesh-eating robot)  13:29, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - I'd say it falls just short of the notability requirements, but short is short. Ironholds (talk) 14:28, 23 August 2009 (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.