Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/North Fork Brewery
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. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:06, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
North Fork Brewery[edit]
- North Fork Brewery (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Per WP:Breweries. No significant coverage in reliable sources. All print coverage is in travel guides or articles. Ibadibam (talk) 00:15, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 01:02, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 01:02, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Loads of substantial coverage in reliable independent sources. Candleabracadabra (talk) 01:18, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Please elaborate. I only see local coverage: a couple of restaurant reviews and one blurb about their solar panels. Not exactly WP:ORGDEPTH. "Local newspaper reviews do not serve to convey notability to restaurants." (WP:REST) Ibadibam (talk) 20:14, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The Seattle Times is a major newspaper and their coverage is certainly more than a mere mention. As you've noted, the business's use of solar panels has been reported on (fairly widely actually). So has the business's beer offerings and brewing activities. Its being a wedding chapel is also reported on in the media and the business's decor and collection of beer memorabilia is also noted in some depth in numerous sources. It's notable because many media sources have reported on it in varying degrees of depth. The coverage is plentiful and in media large and small. Candleabracadabra (talk) 22:18, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- All this stuff would make great supporting sources for secondary information in the article. What we don't have is a single source that says that the place is significant. We've got local restaurant reviews, a local one-paragraph blurb about the solar panels (which was picked up by a paper in another county as well). I see one example of regional coverage, which you were kind enough to link to: the Seattle Times gives a few paragraphs on the brewery in a travel column. It doesn't say that the brewery is famous, influential, or in any other way noteworthy, just that they had a nice time there. We need a source that establishes the brewery's notability, not merely its existence. Ibadibam (talk) 23:29, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The Seattle Times article, one of the many articles covering various aspects of this business (in addition to the coverage in books) calls it a "marvel". It also notes that it contains a beer shrine. What more do you want? I have never read an article in any paper that says "XYZ is a significant and noteworthy business that meets Wikipedia standards for notability.." It's covered substantially in many reliable and independent sources. Candleabracadabra (talk) 02:44, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- You keep using this word "many" when you talk about the sources, but as I've pointed out there's only a handful, and the Seattle Times column is the only thing that half resembles significant coverage. I feel like you're trying to exclude a crucial clause of GNG: Coverage isn't a guarantee of notability, just an indication that notability is likely. Look at Diamond Knot Brewing Company, for example. The same newspaper says that that brewery is "widely regarded as producing some of the best, most innovative beers in the region". That's notability, per the guideline. If I'm not explaining this well enough, WP:WINERY is relevant (albeit unadopted) and gives a little more depth. The bottom line is that we can't indiscriminately include every business that appears in print. There's just not enough information in the world for a full article on this (see the first point of WP:WHYN). Ibadibam (talk) 17:38, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The Seattle Times article, one of the many articles covering various aspects of this business (in addition to the coverage in books) calls it a "marvel". It also notes that it contains a beer shrine. What more do you want? I have never read an article in any paper that says "XYZ is a significant and noteworthy business that meets Wikipedia standards for notability.." It's covered substantially in many reliable and independent sources. Candleabracadabra (talk) 02:44, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- All this stuff would make great supporting sources for secondary information in the article. What we don't have is a single source that says that the place is significant. We've got local restaurant reviews, a local one-paragraph blurb about the solar panels (which was picked up by a paper in another county as well). I see one example of regional coverage, which you were kind enough to link to: the Seattle Times gives a few paragraphs on the brewery in a travel column. It doesn't say that the brewery is famous, influential, or in any other way noteworthy, just that they had a nice time there. We need a source that establishes the brewery's notability, not merely its existence. Ibadibam (talk) 23:29, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The Seattle Times is a major newspaper and their coverage is certainly more than a mere mention. As you've noted, the business's use of solar panels has been reported on (fairly widely actually). So has the business's beer offerings and brewing activities. Its being a wedding chapel is also reported on in the media and the business's decor and collection of beer memorabilia is also noted in some depth in numerous sources. It's notable because many media sources have reported on it in varying degrees of depth. The coverage is plentiful and in media large and small. Candleabracadabra (talk) 22:18, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - There are two monthly regional brewing trade publications in the Pacific Northwest, in existence for many years, and it is extremely unlikely that any brewery in Washington or Oregon is going to be a GNG fail if those are sifted carefully. Carrite (talk)
- Remember that coverage in sources establishes a presumption, and not a guarantee, of notability. The subject must have some impact. WP:Breweries indicates "notable and demonstrable effects on culture, society, economies, or history" as notability criteria. Ibadibam (talk) 20:14, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:07, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Along with the coverage noted by Candelabracadabra (in publications such as the Bellingham Herald and the Seattle Times), this book devotes several pages to the brewery. I'd add it as a reference but my copy hasn't arrived in the mail yet; maybe in a week or two. Chubbles (talk) 04:05, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The book cited is not a restaurant guide, it's a book about craft beer and the fact that it covers this business on multiple pages shows that it's coverage amount to much more than just a listing. It is covered as a notable and signifant establishment. Hence it merits inclusion here and meets Wikipedia's notability criteria. Candleabracadabra (talk) 22:23, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- You're right that it's not a restaurant guide; it's a brewery guide. There are guidebooks for all kinds of businesses, but the principle is the same. We don't have a page for all 115 breweries covered in this book, because not all of them are notable. Does this book call out North Fork as being an exceptional or influential example from the field? If so, then there are probably other sources out there establishing the subject's notability, and they must be found if this article is to be kept. Ibadibam (talk) 23:09, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The book cited is not a restaurant guide, it's a book about craft beer and the fact that it covers this business on multiple pages shows that it's coverage amount to much more than just a listing. It is covered as a notable and signifant establishment. Hence it merits inclusion here and meets Wikipedia's notability criteria. Candleabracadabra (talk) 22:23, 26 August 2013 (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.