- 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 keep. Mark Arsten ( talk) 06:49, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
Texas de Brazil
- Texas de Brazil ( | 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 blatant advertorial; has been flagged as such for months, to no avail. If the advert-like text was removed, very little would be left of the article apart from lists and infoboxes, hence proposing deletion rather than cleaning it up, as that would leave only a sub-stub that merely listed the restuarant and its branches, and Wikipedia is not a business directory.
Some evidence of notability (referred to in lots of restuarant guides, generally with good reviews), otherwise would simply nominate for speedy deletion -- even so, may still be deletable on those grounds alone if more verifiable direct coverage of it as primary topic cannot be found. -- The Anome ( talk) 14:15, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 23:18, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 23:19, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 23:19, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
-
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten ( talk) 00:22, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep Very notable restaurant chain in the United States. Covered in reliable sources. Candleabracadabra ( talk) 03:29, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
- keep remove the adverspam, but even as a stub, the restaurant is very notable. Tons of reviews in restaurant guides
https://www.google.com/search?q=texas+de+brazil&oq=texas+de+brazil&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i60l2j0l2j69i60.2595j0j7&sourceid=chrome&espv=210&es_sm=93&ie=UTF-8#q=texas+de+brazil&tbm=bks
Gaijin42 (
talk) 18:30, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
- Note - Reviews do not establish notability, only verifiability. This is because they fall under WP:Routine, that is reviews are standard fare in just about every local periodical - regardless of the source. See also WP:Run-of-the-mill-- Jeremy ( blah blah • I did it!) 08:22, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep - Passes WP:CORPDEPTH. Source examples include: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]. Many more sources exist about this restaurant chain. Northamerica1000 (talk) 11:20, 18 January 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 keep. Mark Arsten ( talk) 06:49, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
Texas de Brazil
- Texas de Brazil ( | 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 blatant advertorial; has been flagged as such for months, to no avail. If the advert-like text was removed, very little would be left of the article apart from lists and infoboxes, hence proposing deletion rather than cleaning it up, as that would leave only a sub-stub that merely listed the restuarant and its branches, and Wikipedia is not a business directory.
Some evidence of notability (referred to in lots of restuarant guides, generally with good reviews), otherwise would simply nominate for speedy deletion -- even so, may still be deletable on those grounds alone if more verifiable direct coverage of it as primary topic cannot be found. -- The Anome ( talk) 14:15, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 23:18, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 23:19, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 23:19, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
-
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten ( talk) 00:22, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep Very notable restaurant chain in the United States. Covered in reliable sources. Candleabracadabra ( talk) 03:29, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
- keep remove the adverspam, but even as a stub, the restaurant is very notable. Tons of reviews in restaurant guides
https://www.google.com/search?q=texas+de+brazil&oq=texas+de+brazil&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i60l2j0l2j69i60.2595j0j7&sourceid=chrome&espv=210&es_sm=93&ie=UTF-8#q=texas+de+brazil&tbm=bks
Gaijin42 (
talk) 18:30, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
- Note - Reviews do not establish notability, only verifiability. This is because they fall under WP:Routine, that is reviews are standard fare in just about every local periodical - regardless of the source. See also WP:Run-of-the-mill-- Jeremy ( blah blah • I did it!) 08:22, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep - Passes WP:CORPDEPTH. Source examples include: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]. Many more sources exist about this restaurant chain. Northamerica1000 (talk) 11:20, 18 January 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.