Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mrs. Wilkes' Dining Room

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 speedy keep. Newly added sources are sufficient to establish notability. This article was completely unsourced when I nominated it for AfD. The creator of the article does not automatically mean this subject is notable. (non-admin closure) sovereign°sentinel (contribs) 01:45, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mrs. Wilkes' Dining Room[edit]

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

This does not seem to meet WP:GNG. sovereign°sentinel (contribs) 18:47, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep This clearly meets WP:GNG as it is covered in detail in numerous sources - see the search links above. Given this and the fact that the article was created by Jimbo, this seems to be a disruptive nomination contrary to WP:SK, "Obviously frivolous or vexatious nominations ...nominations which are made solely to provide a forum for disruption". Andrew D. (talk) 19:13, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, covered in Georgia's official tourism site, Savannah Morning News, W Magazine. I could probably go on, but three is more than enough for notability. As an aside, why is it that whenever Jimmy Wales writes an article on a restaurant, people try to delete it? Just something I've noticed. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 00:30, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep I think it passes the notability requirement because of the nature of its dining taken in conjunction with its notable patrons. Neither criterion by itself would make it pass GNG. There are probably quite a few other restaurants in the USA that offer the homely dining experience of a traditional family Sunday lunch; lots that can claim the past patronage of presidents; and possibly a few others that have been the location for live NBC broadcasts; but none that can check all three of those boxes. If nothing else, the restaurant is notable because it is one of the few dining venues in the English speaking world that promotes the proper use of apostrophes. If it had been called Mrs. Wilkes's Dining Room I would have voted for Speedy Deletion. — not really here discuss 01:16, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment / Question The article is tagged as being a stub. It has 3 valid RS, 2 external links, and 2 images, and says all it needs to say. It's just a concise short article, not a stub. A stub needs expanding. Tagging this article as a stub is only going to encourage people to add factoid-level and non-encyclopedic material to bloviate it over an undefined line into being a full-blown article. Thus people might add things such as example course-by-course menus of typical fare served in the past. Such obvious padding would lower the quality of the article IMO. There is nothing wrong with being a short, concise article. I wanted to remove the stub tag but I will leave that decision to others. — not really here discuss 01:35, 12 September 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.