Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of buffet restaurants

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) Mdaniels5757 (talk) 23:36, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

List of buffet restaurants[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)

As 62.165.227.49 said in the failed RM on the talk page, the article should be deleted per WP:NOTDIRECTORY, item #7, as a simple listing without context information. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 17:36, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 17:36, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NOTDIRECTORY. Schazjmd (talk) 17:42, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as index of articles per WP:LISTPURP and as complement to Category:Buffet restaurants per WP:CLN. There are notable buffet restaurants. We list and categorize articles by what their subjects are. It's just as simple as that, and commenters above need to read all of NOTDIR, which clearly states just that. They are also not understanding what "without context" means because "buffet restaurant" is plainly defined both by the intro and the linked article buffet, so we know what this list and its corresponding category should include. postdlf (talk) 17:55, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep this could be quite useful. Devokewater (talk) 18:48, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP Anything in the category can be listed here with additional information shown, making it far more useful than a category. Dream Focus 19:00, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – This list of notable restaurants qualifies for an article per WP:NOTDUP relative to Category:Buffet restaurants and also functions as a valuable information source and navigational aid, as per WP:LISTPURP. This is demonstrated in part per the page views that the article receives compared to the category page: The list article has received an average of 160 page views per day between 1/1/2020 and 6/30/2020 (link), whereas during the same time period, the category page has only received an average of 4 page views per day (link). The list clearly has more utility for WP:READERS compared to the category, and furthermore, contrary to the nomination for deletion, this list article does provide context information, specifically in its lead section. Some entries on the list also have descriptions, and more can easily be added. Also, contrary to WP:NOTDIRECTORY, this is a discriminate, refined list that only includes topics that have their own articles on Wikipedia. It is not an indiscriminate list of all buffet restaurants in the world, nor is it a list of loosely associated topics or a yellow pages type page that has contact information such as phone numbers, fax numbers and e-mail addresses. This article has none of this. As such, WP:NOTDIRECTORY is being misapplied toward this article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:46, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per NA1k. These types of list articles, populated by notable examples, are part of how we organize data. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 13:53, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As others have said, these lists are very useful and well-used. The key is to keep them free of redlinks. Lard Almighty (talk) 16:09, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – It meets the one GNG exception as applied to lists (restricts inclusion to notable items), and adheres to criteria outlined within WP:LISTN — WILDSTAR^talk 16:44, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - WP:NOTDIRECTORY doesn’t imply deletion this way - lists are written differently then that. The reasoning is that there are enough notable examples to make the list meet the GNG exception. Eternal Shadow Talk 16:52, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete KFC is on here because apparently "some locations include a buffet". There are lots of restaurants that maybe a few locations have a buffet, and lots of other issues in buffet service. This can be covered by articles, there is no benefit to having a list.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:58, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I have noted this in the past too but it's an argument for clearly defining what is a buffet restaurant and cleaning up the list, not deleting it.
That one entry on a list is improper is an argument for removing or editing that entry, not for deleting the list, any more than bad grammer in one sentence is an argument for deleting an article. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 17:05, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I was ready to 86 it, but on reading it fully, it look like it passes WP:LIST. It's limited in scope, has all blue links, and verifiable. Bearian (talk) 00:30, 10 July 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.