Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joiners Arms

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) czar · · 22:49, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Joiners Arms[edit]

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

Unsourced article that looks more like an advertisement. Such a minor venue does not need such an excessive long list of bands. The Banner talk 19:03, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:43, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:43, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:44, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

keep It's not CBGB or Eric's, but the Joiners' Arms has been a regionally important venue for indie bands for the length of the pop era. I fail to understand why a long list of bands playing there means that it's non-notable. Andy Dingley (talk) 01:00, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I can understand you fail to understand the remark about the list, as you read something in it what I don't say or intended to say. What I do say is that not every gig of a band needs to be stated in an article about a minor concert venue. The venue should be notable and even an excessive long list of bands does not make the venue notable, as a concert venue is supposed to have concerts. The Banner talk 08:20, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- We do not allow categories for venues, but I see no objection to having an article. There may be a quesiton of verifying to the list of bands, but subject to that it seems OK. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:57, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- Certainly the article needs a bit of work, most importantly on the referencing front, but there's nothing in the nominator's rationale that justifies deletion as opposed to improvement. WaggersTALK 07:09, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In today's NME there is a two-page feature on this venue, which has been named 'Britain's Best Small Venue' in a NME/Jack Daniels poll. --Michig (talk) 17:47, 5 June 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.