Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Top Boy (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  d elete. - Mailer Diablo 12:20, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Top Boy (Restaurant Chain)

 * - (View AfD) (View log)

contested prod. NN defunct restaurant chain, no indication the company ever met criteria of WP:CORP Agent 86 01:39, 24 January 2007 (UTC) So I throw a little stub of an article up on Wikipedia in the hopes it attracts someone who has actually seen the subject in question and can actually provide some facts about what the place was really like. The place has been either a parking lot or a Dunkin' Donuts for as long as I've lived here, and the locals I've talked to have no idea what it was like. But for a while, it was a living breathing piece of Americana.
 * Delete per WP:V. Searches for "Top Boy" restaurant yield nothing reliable. The vague desciption of the chain makes me believe that it would never pass WP:CORP and finding reliable source would be impossible. Mitaphane talk 01:56, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete no evidence that the restaurant did anything outside Rantoul, IL. And the only source is some sort of blog or forum which doesn't really even discuss the chain.  The creator's note on the talk page seems to confirm the lack of notability.  Montco 04:00, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete notability. Philippe Beaudette 05:54, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete not significant and probably not even notable. Kai A. Simon 12:53, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete not notable.--Rudjek 17:16, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The talk page of the article says, "This is basically a fishing expedition to gather more information on a soda cup I found in my basement." I think the research should be done by the person submitting the article so it meets Wikipedia's notability and verifiability standards from the start.  Delete.  --Elkman - (Elkspeak) 19:47, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - No verifiable sources are given that establish sufficient notability. - Shaundakulbara 04:13, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

All I have to go on is an empty soda cup and someone's comments on a Burger Chef fan page. So I figure I can harness the powers of Collaborative Information Gathering and Organization and revive this dying piece of history--I might jog the memory of someone else who can contribute something useful to those who study pop culture.

(Unlike the lot of you who think pedantic nonsense like "correcting" the spelling of amoung to "among" is helping out, it is those thousands who are moved to contribute their knowledge to a topic few others have heard of that give the wiki its strength.)

So enjoy deleting this article and continue being the bunch of petty counter-productive bureauratic tryant-knobs that you appear to be. Just don't be surprised when Wikipedia vanishes into obscurity as quickly as it flashed to the forefront, all because you thought collaborative information gathering wasn't as important as you casting a vote on what is "important" or not.--ObsequiosityFYM 02:18, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. No evidence that the WP:CORP has been met. WMMartin 16:35, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Though I have to say that anyone who wants to destroy modernist-looking churches ( see pic with article ) is OK with me. WMMartin 16:37, 26 January 2007 (UTC)


 * STRONG KEEP As obscure as this company is now, this does not preclude it's importance in a specific geographic area or period of history. WP:SNOWBALL Nkras 01:44, 29 January 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.