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 only indication of notability here is a list of "top 200 gay bars in the world". That's not enough for notability, and so unreliable a source that I listed it as A7, but it was declined. I assume there are some local sources also, but they won't help a local establishment. DGG (
talk ) 22:39, 28 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Comment I didn't decline it in the strictest sense as I'm not an admin. A7 is not actually about notability; it's about there not being a credible claim of importance, and I'd say being in a "top x number of anything" in a notable magazine is one. Nor did I think it was advertising. I also know an admin did decline an almost identical article.
Adam9007 (
talk) 22:47, 28 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep, of course. This establishment has been covered by more than just local sources, including The Advocate, Instinct, and National Review. Also, Out is not an unreliable source, contrary to the nominator's comments. This article should be expanded, not deleted. See additional sources:
Comment - I'd like to see the article actually expanded out with the sources found by
Another Believer before a judgment is made. As-written, I'd agree with nom, but the article may have unseen possibilities.
Lithorien (
talk) 01:32, 29 December 2015 (UTC)reply
I could see an expanded article looking somewhat similar to
Three Sisters Tavern, which has been promoted to Good status. This article is short, but offers a description of the bar and its history, and includes a reception section. I was creating stubs of LGBT bars based on the Out list, in an attempt to fill a content gap and increase the number of articles related to gay culture and the LGBT community. I don't think we should be so quick to delete stubs. Clearly there are sources that can be used to expand the article. Wikipedia is a work in progress, yes? Let's give these articles time to grow. ---
Another Believer(
Talk) 05:09, 29 December 2015 (UTC)reply
This is the sort of article I would like to spend time expanding, but I can't promise to do so immediately. I am working on many articles currently, and have 8 awaiting Good article reviews. But, I think there is enough information about this bar to justify a Wikipedia article. ---
Another Believer(
Talk) 05:53, 29 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Question '{U|Another Believe}} I nominated this as one among the many articles whose only references is the 200 Gay Bars list, as a test nomination; I don't like to nominate multiple articles in a category simultaneously. Are the others on the list for which you have made articles of similar notability to this one, or have you not determined that? Myself, I am not an expert on bars of any kind. But our general standards for eating & drinking establishments seems to be whether they are known beyond the local area. In this case, there is some coverage beyond Denver, but it seems to relate to one particular incident--if it were a person, it would be BLP1E, but we have no such rule for companies; the nearest is NOT NEWS. DGG (
talk ) 04:53, 31 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 07:10, 4 January 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.