Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mom's Breastaurant

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. MBisanz ^talk 00:50, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mom's Breastaurant[edit]

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

According to the organization's web site, the single location organization hasn't been active since 2012. Their Facebook page is missing. I can find only one reliable source about the group. Based on Non-commercial organizations, it fails the two key tests:

Organizations are usually notable if they meet both of the following standards:

The scope of their activities is national or international in scale.
The organization has received significant coverage in multiple reliable sources that are independent of the organization.

Based on these standards, I think this group and the article lack notability. — btphelps ^{(talk to me) (what I've done)} 04:40, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:06, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:06, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:06, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as there are simply no signs of improvement and this has not changed much since starting in June 2009 with my searches finding nothing good at all. SwisterTwister talk 06:52, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam Sailor ^Talk! 07:12, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete - I looked, but failed to find sufficient sources to satisfy WP:GNG/WP:ORG. Some small blogs, social media, and primary, but not enough otherwise. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 13:16, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete My searches show there's just not enough coverage out there. A complimentary news piece or two isn't enough. Additionally, nearly all the sourcing would seem to be from 2008/2009 (when this sort of thing was in the news quite a bit), which suggests this is lacking long-term notability. I'm wary of deleting an article that has remained unchallenged for such a long time, but don't see a way forward involving keeping it.--69.204.153.39 (talk) 04:17, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - not enough in-depth coverage to show they meet either WP:GNG or WP:NORG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:57, 12 October 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.