Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pavement Coffeehouse

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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:19, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pavement Coffeehouse[edit]

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

All sources appear to be short reviews or blurbs. Not significant coverage. CapitalSasha ~ talk 07:39, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 09:17, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 09:17, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 09:17, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep well-known chain in the Boston area; I added one story from the Globe about the chain opening its most recent store. Leaning towards Keep. GlassCobra 18:37, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The top four hits on Google Books are: The Unsustained Darkness, Fodor's Boston, The Rough Guide to New England, Lonely Planet Boston. These are not consistent with, "All sources appear to be short reviews or blurbs." Unscintillating (talk) 01:54, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Should have said "all sources cited in the article." However, the last three sources you note are indeed short reviews, and the first is a passing mention in a work of fiction. CapitalSasha ~ talk 04:43, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as clear advertising followed by local news stories and business announcements, that only shows this is a business listing in which our policies are violated. SwisterTwister talk 18:46, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —MRD2014 (talk • contribs) 16:49, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- an unremarkable local business and spammy content. K.e.coffman (talk) 10:37, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:51, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Most of the sources are of the form "top 50 coffee house in....". These are not useful for notability for WP:CORPDEPTH. If it was indeed notable, I would expect at least some more coverage, rather than inclusion in a list. The book sources are not good enough either - brief references in the context of something else. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 02:57, 13 January 2017 (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.