Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/World Famous Kenton Club


 * 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. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  11:00, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

World Famous Kenton Club

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Just one of the many local bars. Lacks general notability for inclusion in Wikipedia. Graywalls (talk) 07:22, 11 March 2019 (UTC) I am also nominating the following related pages because it re-directs to this article:
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Graywalls (talk) 07:37, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Graywalls (talk) 07:39, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America1000 08:16, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions. North America1000 08:16, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions. North America1000 08:16, 11 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete. Fails '''WP:NORG, local coverage only. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 09:26, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep: This article should be expanded, not deleted. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 14:46, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Noteing that Another Believer  created the page.  I am perfectly willing to believe that a bar in Portland could be notable, and that it is beloved by locals.  But I  note that all of the 3 sources on the page are local, Portland papers.E.M.Gregory (talk) 17:16, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 * There is some coverage in The Oregonian as well, which is not just a local paper. Trying to add some of the (paywalled) sources to the talk page for future reference. There's also a profile published by The Portland Tribune, but I acknowledge this is additional local coverage. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 17:21, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 * comment There are many editors with interest in topics related to the Pacific Northwest and you're not the exceptionally few with access to non Google retrievable sources. Many people have access to newspaper sources outside of their metropolitan area through their public library card and students often have database access through academic database subscriptions through their institution. Most public library and institutes of higher education in Oregon should have access to the Oregonian. So "paywall" is a relatively unimportant hurdle.Graywalls (talk) 17:56, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I wasn't suggesting paywalled sources are problematic, I'm simply saying there is some sourcing that does not come up in a simple Google search. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 18:11, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I believe there's enough coverage, but I doubt I'll be able to rescue this one in time because I'm also working on several others nominated by the same editor. I may just have to start over in the draft space, which is unfortunate but happens sometimes. Meantime, I'm not surprised folks would elect to delete the current version of the article. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 17:44, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Belated comment here. I took a look at the sources you posted on the article's talk page, and I'm skeptical there's enough coverage to satisfy WP:NORG. The Portland Tribune source is a good find, enough to pass GNG in my view, but still local coverage. The Oregonian articles only mention the bar in passing, and I wasn't able to turn up anything else in Multnomah County Library's Oregonian database. The article could certainly be expanded from its current state, but are you sure there's enough coverage to establish notability? Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 22:28, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
 * , No, but don't worry, I've saved a copy at Draft:World Famous Kenton Club for future expansion when I have more time. The current article should have just been redirected or moved into draft space from the start... --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 22:30, 15 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete There is no evidence this is notable or significant, as shown by the total lack of in-depth coverage. Hyper local "coverage" (and I'd hardly even call it that) is all that appears to exist and doing a book search brings up a Simon Kenton Club which is unrelated. Praxidicae (talk) 14:55, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:SIGCOV. If, however, someone expands and sources it up to speed, feel free to ping me to reconsider.E.M.Gregory (talk) 17:16, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Many local venues have routine local coverage that includes feature articles but I don't believe that meets Wikipedia's requirements of significant coverage. Reywas92Talk 19:12, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - lack of WP:Significant coverage needed to establish notability --DannyS712 (talk) 22:22, 11 March 2019 (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.