- 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. Lankiveil ( speak to me) 11:19, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Lotus Nightclub
- Lotus Nightclub ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Article is a means of WP:PROMOTION failing WP:NPOV for a nightclub that doesn't meet WP:GNG. Sources either aren't WP:RS (rather, they are advertising sites) or are WP:ROUTINE covering criminal incidents at the establishment. Hwy43 ( talk) 03:15, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Hwy43 ( talk) 03:05, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
Check the references! The article is verifiable! Is it really this hard to contribute to Wikipedia? User:Drummer14cnr
- Delete A run-of-the-mill nightclub with run-of-the-mill coverage (and not much of that) in local media outlets. I am sorry, but a nightclub doesn't become notable because a bouncer once got shot, not at this joint, but at a strip club next door. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:00, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
- Delete. I could find no evidence suggesting this is anything other than the run-of-the-mill local bar it appears to be. This is on the edge of being eligible for speedy deletion under WP:CSD#G11 as unambiguous promotion. -- Arxiloxos ( talk) 06:54, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
- Delete. Nothing found general notability guideline about this topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.178.16.186 ( talk) 08:56, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
- Do Not Delete. So just because the article has references to promotion websites its deemed a promotional article? We have seen references like this all over Wikipedia. I in no way, shape or form see how this article is promoting anything. The references may be but those references are there to insure that this place actually exists. Drummer14cnr ( talk) 16:48, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
- It's not just about promotion (although the various unsourced claims about its popularity could be taken as promotion), it's about the lack of meaningful in-depth coverage. 2 local newspaper stories and some directory listings aren't enough to meet WP:GNG or WP:CORP. -- Colapeninsula ( talk) 20:22, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
- Delete. No notability. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.70.20.39 ( talk) 18:58, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the
list of Business-related deletion discussions.
• Gene93k (
talk) 16:55, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
- Drummer14cnr, there simply isn't any indication that this business is anything more than a run of the mill local business, and the article looks like advertising, which goes against our strong policy spelled out at WP:NOTADVERTISING. Wikipedia doesn't collect articles on routine local businesses. You asked above if it is "really this hard to contribute to Wikipedia". The answer is that we welcome and try to encourage new editors, but the contributions need to be about topics that actually belong here. For example, in the article for Red Deer, Alberta, I noted that the city has at least three sizable high schools, only one of which currently has an article (and that one is scanty). Red Deer's three high schools are examples of worthwhile subjects for this encyclopedia; the Lotus Nightclub isn't. -- Arxiloxos ( talk) 17:10, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
- Delete. I wouldn't quite call for speedy deletion, but it's still not notable. Once it attracts national attention, maybe it will qualify for an article. NinjaRobotPirate ( talk) 18:37, 1 March 2014 (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.
- 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. Lankiveil ( speak to me) 11:19, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Lotus Nightclub
- Lotus Nightclub ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Article is a means of WP:PROMOTION failing WP:NPOV for a nightclub that doesn't meet WP:GNG. Sources either aren't WP:RS (rather, they are advertising sites) or are WP:ROUTINE covering criminal incidents at the establishment. Hwy43 ( talk) 03:15, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Hwy43 ( talk) 03:05, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
Check the references! The article is verifiable! Is it really this hard to contribute to Wikipedia? User:Drummer14cnr
- Delete A run-of-the-mill nightclub with run-of-the-mill coverage (and not much of that) in local media outlets. I am sorry, but a nightclub doesn't become notable because a bouncer once got shot, not at this joint, but at a strip club next door. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:00, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
- Delete. I could find no evidence suggesting this is anything other than the run-of-the-mill local bar it appears to be. This is on the edge of being eligible for speedy deletion under WP:CSD#G11 as unambiguous promotion. -- Arxiloxos ( talk) 06:54, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
- Delete. Nothing found general notability guideline about this topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.178.16.186 ( talk) 08:56, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
- Do Not Delete. So just because the article has references to promotion websites its deemed a promotional article? We have seen references like this all over Wikipedia. I in no way, shape or form see how this article is promoting anything. The references may be but those references are there to insure that this place actually exists. Drummer14cnr ( talk) 16:48, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
- It's not just about promotion (although the various unsourced claims about its popularity could be taken as promotion), it's about the lack of meaningful in-depth coverage. 2 local newspaper stories and some directory listings aren't enough to meet WP:GNG or WP:CORP. -- Colapeninsula ( talk) 20:22, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
- Delete. No notability. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.70.20.39 ( talk) 18:58, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the
list of Business-related deletion discussions.
• Gene93k (
talk) 16:55, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
- Drummer14cnr, there simply isn't any indication that this business is anything more than a run of the mill local business, and the article looks like advertising, which goes against our strong policy spelled out at WP:NOTADVERTISING. Wikipedia doesn't collect articles on routine local businesses. You asked above if it is "really this hard to contribute to Wikipedia". The answer is that we welcome and try to encourage new editors, but the contributions need to be about topics that actually belong here. For example, in the article for Red Deer, Alberta, I noted that the city has at least three sizable high schools, only one of which currently has an article (and that one is scanty). Red Deer's three high schools are examples of worthwhile subjects for this encyclopedia; the Lotus Nightclub isn't. -- Arxiloxos ( talk) 17:10, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
- Delete. I wouldn't quite call for speedy deletion, but it's still not notable. Once it attracts national attention, maybe it will qualify for an article. NinjaRobotPirate ( talk) 18:37, 1 March 2014 (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.