Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harrah's Council Bluffs

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. czar 07:12, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Harrah's Council Bluffs[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

It exists and has mentions, mainly in promotional material. Doesn't meet WP:CORP or WP:GNG. Has been in CAT:NN for over 11 years. Boleyn (talk) 09:24, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. ~ Amkgp 💬 12:38, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nebraska-related deletion discussions. ~ Amkgp 💬 12:38, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:59, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There are plentiful sources available. The property has been around since 1996, so most of the sources are not to be found in a Google search.. for topics like this one has to look at news archives. Also the property was renamed from Harveys in 2001, so both names have to be searched. A small sampling of what can be found in a few minutes on NewsBank: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] Toohool (talk) 02:24, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:41, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Sources are plentiful so it comes down to notability. There's probably more to be said here about Harrah's in Iowa that's not promotional: Harrah's political influence, the abandonment of the "riverboat" requirement, its status as a employer, its revenue from another state's citizens from across the river where gambling's illegal. The article's in reasonable shape as is and already well integrated. --Lockley (talk) 20:34, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Significant coverage in RS as something other than mere promotional or visitor/touristic information has been demonstrated by the Omaha World Herald article and the references supplied by Toohool above. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 22:06, 13 August 2020 (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.