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.
I haven't been able to find evidence of notability, the BBC source has brief mention about a pub The BoothMarvellous Spider-Man (
talk) 06:05, 11 August 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete One passing mention in a BBC news report for the pub, "The Booth." Lacks the depth of coverage required by
WP:CORP. Article is promotional in tone and the work of a
single purpose account. At best,
it's too early to know if this business will become notable.
Geoff | Who, me? 16:49, 12 August 2016 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 11:27, 18 August 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete. I think I remember reading the original TE piece on this, but this microbrewery/bar, started by the journalist, sadly is not encyclopedic.
WP:NOTADVERTISING, etc. I'd encourage the creator to instead consider writing an article about
History of beer in Korea or such, where they could probably mention TE article, and maybe even this bar/microbrewery (in a sentence or two) if they can word it and source it well enough. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus|
reply here 12:00, 18 August 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete Being courteous I'd say
WP:TOOSOON. I found some blog-type post
[1] and some Korean websites of some sort mentioning an album collaboration
[2],
[3] and
[4]. However those websites don't seem to be that notable. All in all there doesn't seem to be enough coverage focusing on Booth Brewing, yet.
Mr. Magoo (
talk) 12:02, 18 August 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete -- the company is unlikely to be notable at this time given the lack of sufficient sources.
K.e.coffman (
talk) 02:43, 25 August 2016 (UTC)reply
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.
I haven't been able to find evidence of notability, the BBC source has brief mention about a pub The BoothMarvellous Spider-Man (
talk) 06:05, 11 August 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete One passing mention in a BBC news report for the pub, "The Booth." Lacks the depth of coverage required by
WP:CORP. Article is promotional in tone and the work of a
single purpose account. At best,
it's too early to know if this business will become notable.
Geoff | Who, me? 16:49, 12 August 2016 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 11:27, 18 August 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete. I think I remember reading the original TE piece on this, but this microbrewery/bar, started by the journalist, sadly is not encyclopedic.
WP:NOTADVERTISING, etc. I'd encourage the creator to instead consider writing an article about
History of beer in Korea or such, where they could probably mention TE article, and maybe even this bar/microbrewery (in a sentence or two) if they can word it and source it well enough. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus|
reply here 12:00, 18 August 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete Being courteous I'd say
WP:TOOSOON. I found some blog-type post
[1] and some Korean websites of some sort mentioning an album collaboration
[2],
[3] and
[4]. However those websites don't seem to be that notable. All in all there doesn't seem to be enough coverage focusing on Booth Brewing, yet.
Mr. Magoo (
talk) 12:02, 18 August 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete -- the company is unlikely to be notable at this time given the lack of sufficient sources.
K.e.coffman (
talk) 02:43, 25 August 2016 (UTC)reply
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.