This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
food and
drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink articles
Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review
WP:Trivia and
WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this.
Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects,
select here.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Oregon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
U.S. state of
Oregon on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OregonWikipedia:WikiProject OregonTemplate:WikiProject OregonOregon articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the
United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
@
Deb: Regardless of article/draft quality, based on secondary coverage (not just what's listed immediately above), do you have any thoughts on whether or not Elephants Delicatessen is a notable chain? ---
Another Believer(
Talk) 19:28, 11 March 2019 (UTC)reply
It may well be, but the article needs to demonstrate that. It's not enough to say on the Talk page that there are plenty of sources or that the chain is notable; you need to make the claim in the article and explain why.
Deb (
talk) 19:34, 11 March 2019 (UTC)reply
Deb, Thanks for weighing in. I guess I was just trying to get a sense of whether or not you felt the topic was notable based on secondary coverage, which is what we discuss at AfD. ---
Another Believer(
Talk) 19:35, 11 March 2019 (UTC)reply
With most of the sources you've listed above, it is difficult to say whether they are truly independent. Local publications and directories often give free advertising to local businesses and such coverage as they do give is rarely "significant".
Deb (
talk) 19:39, 11 March 2019 (UTC)reply
@
Graywalls: Bringing this discussion to your attention as well. Have you had a chance to review sourcing of this chain, and do you have thoughts on notability based on coverage (setting aside the quality of the current draft)? ---
Another Believer(
Talk) 19:44, 11 March 2019 (UTC)reply
@
Another Believer:, I decided to solicit outside input on the interpretation of notability for companies. For now, I don't know. Oh, well, heh.
Graywalls (
talk) 17:04, 13 March 2019 (UTC)reply
Graywalls, Oh well? You nominate a page for deletion but then don't care about whether or not the topic has sufficient secondary coverage? ---
Another Believer(
Talk) 17:06, 13 March 2019 (UTC)reply
I'm checking on the audience coverage. Chill out. I'm not worked up or antsy about it as you're. I don't understand why you have such a sense of urgency over everything like this is life and death matter.
Graywalls (
talk) 17:30, 13 March 2019 (UTC)reply
Graywalls, I don't think this is urgent or a life/death matter, rest assured. ---
Another Believer(
Talk) 17:33, 13 March 2019 (UTC)reply
@
Another Believer: I'm awaiting on some input on the business notability talk page hoping to get some input that is helpful for the future too.
Graywalls (
talk) 03:06, 14 March 2019 (UTC)reply
(From
WT:ORG). A large portion of the above sources remain brief, local, sometimes promotional coverage (a Zagat listing obviously does not contribute to notability). Several are routine local business news blurbs reporting on basic openings of locations or generic reviews by the local paper that critiques most dining establishments. It not obvious that even these sources together pass NCORP. However due to the presence of many locations and the Unique Eats book's claim, somewhat corroborated by the other links, that it's "A Portland mainstay for almost too many reasons to count", I do think this business is indeed notable and could be moved to the mainspace, provided that notability is actually asserted in the article. It should demonstrate why it's notable, rather than assume that because it exists and because local sources give it routine coverage it's automatically notable. The considered CSD was not entirely unwarranted.
Reywas92Talk 20:13, 13 March 2019 (UTC)reply
Reywas92, Thanks. The above sourcing is not meant to be an exhaustive list of available references, just a very quick and easy list I compiled based on a Google search. Surely there are more Oregonian articles to incorporate via Google News or the archives at the library. Agree to disagree on the CSD being appropriate, but regardless, thanks for weighing in here and confirming your thoughts re: notability. ---
Another Believer(
Talk) 20:20, 13 March 2019 (UTC)reply
This article has survived AfD. Any opposition to me archiving this discussion? ---
Another Believer(
Talk) 18:38, 9 March 2022 (UTC)reply
While the article survived AfD, the point that
Deb made three years ago at the start of the thread still stands. The article makes no claim of notability, as it should per
WP:SPEAKSELF. Therefore, I don't see the thread as resolved. In any case, this talk page is not exactly long - 9kb whereas
WP:ARCHIVE suggests thinking about archiving when the page reaches 75kb, so I don't see any need to archive it.
Curb Safe Charmer (
talk) 10:52, 10 March 2022 (UTC)reply