Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/La Belle Province (restaurant)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 (non-admin closure). --Falcon Darkstar Kirtaran (talk) 20:38, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- La Belle Province (restaurant) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Unreferenced for over two years, fails verifiability policy. Also unclear what, if anything, makes this restaurant notable. Stifle (talk) 13:44, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- KeepFor one, it's well known enough to inspire knock-offs. -Oreo Priest talk 15:41, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Quebec-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 16:25, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep 45 locations by 1997, still sifting through sources for a more recent number. It gets 33 results with a very specific query on Lexis-Nexis ("La Bell Province" + fast-food + quebec) and appears to have been part of two major court cases (one of which is alluded to in the article but not covered fully). Sourcing and notability are there, but there is a language barrier and it's hard to search for sources since La Bell Province is an oft-used nickname for Quebec. --Rividian (talk) 20:59, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Up to 125 locations now, due to confusing ownership. Bonus: The National Post calls the franchise "Montreal's McDonald's". --Rividian (talk) 21:11, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep "Unreferenced" does not mean "non-notable". Circeus (talk) 17:10, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- No, but verifiability is required as well as notability for inclusion. Stifle (talk) 08:32, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- It has now been verified, unless you're disputing the sources I've added. --Rividian (talk) 17:20, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- No, but verifiability is required as well as notability for inclusion. Stifle (talk) 08:32, 20 August 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.