Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Necto (nightclub)

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 Delete -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 09:22, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Necto (nightclub)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Questionably notable and improvable as the best I found was this, this, this and this which are not convincingly better to suggest improvement. SwisterTwister talk 06:58, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 06:59, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 06:59, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:22, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Undecided. This should be salvageable as a historical rock concert venue (Chances Are/Second Chances/The Nectarine Ballroom). Probably too detailed on modern nightclub though. Rmhermen (talk) 17:43, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mz7 (talk) 04:21, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:29, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:40, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Can't tell whether it's notable or not, but it's an awful article. Has suffered from COI/SPA issues since the beginning, is like a poor man's press release and extremely unencyclopaedic and non-neutral in tone. If it does survive, it should be nuked and rebuilt from scratch. Rayman60 (talk) 01:08, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, it's so much easier deleting an article than rewrite one! (FYI - the deletionist brigade has arrived so this one is going, going, gone... to Deletionpedia!) --MurderByDeadcopy^"bang!" 20:02, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I'm not sure if this will indeed happen but a third relist would be beneficial. SwisterTwister talk 01:34, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:46, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Searches turned up nothing but trivial mentions. It exists, it has some popularity, but is it notable? Not according to searches. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:49, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not notable: Local club referenced solely with mentions & unreliable sources. Promotional, to the extent of being a misuse of WP as a webhost. DGG ( talk ) 19:37, 23 November 2015 (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.