Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Boulder Dam Brewing Company

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 speedy delete author consent to delete. Pegasus «C¦T» 01:17, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Boulder Dam Brewing Company[edit]

Non-notable brewing company. My speedy deletion tag was removed for a specious reason. Little Red Riding Hoodtalk 03:09, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Notability not established ChildofMidnight (talk) 03:42, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nevada-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 04:57, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 04:58, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 04:58, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There is an assertion, so that might have been the reason the A7 tag was removed, but that said this is NN. Fails WP:CORP and WP:V and may also be a COI. Mister Senseless™ (Speak - Contributions) 07:05, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please remember that COI is not a valid reason for deletion.- Mgm|^(talk) 09:32, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But failure to fit in to WP:CORP is. --Kickstart70TC 03:26, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The Google results yields at least two independent sources that discuss the place which would address the issue of the current referencing. Apparently, this place is a restaurant too. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:32, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Independent sources available. The restaurant/brewery is used as a local museum for artifacts from the building of the Hoover Dam. It has been recognized by several magazines as a big attraction in the area. Gr0ff (talk) 14:24, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question Which sources are you referring to? When I searched google, the only thing I found that meeting the references criteria was this, an article in Las Vegas Review-Journal. The other reviews on google were from a review website that anyone could submit to, and the two links on the article itself are from the brewery's website. Mister Senseless™ (Speak - Contributions) 14:51, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete because there is very little proper sourcing. I've had a look on Google and I can't find anything decent. Reyk _YO! 19:56, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unless there's some print sources we're missing. Mister Senseless™ (Speak - Contributions) 19:59, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps, but the onus is on those arguing to keep to provide those sources- not just assert they exist and leave it at that. I'm quite happy to change my mind, but I need to be convinced first. Reyk _YO! 21:24, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I did a Google search and found nothing in the way of reliable sources. Little Red Riding Hoodtalk 00:20, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. It's all about WP:CORP, and frankly editors refusing to heed that guideline, which was built on consensus. --Kickstart70TC 03:25, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:CORP. The 458-odd hits on both Google and Yahoo are 99.9% not qualified as secondary sources. Geoff (talk) 15:55, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as author and sole contributor. If user-created content does not count as a secondary source, then agreed that article fails WP:CORP. I have no interest in being disruptive to argue this point. Gr0ff (talk) 00:44, 21 November 2008 (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.