Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pipeworks Brewing

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. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 17:46, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pipeworks Brewing[edit]

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

Delete due to lack of established notability in accordance with general or topical guidelines. Article has two sources, a blog and the brewery's primary website. Best regards, Cindy(talk to me) 13:20, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Seriously? I just started the article YESTERDAY and had to go to work before I could start fleshing it out. If you have an axe to grind, just say so. Otherwise, you're coming across as pretty aggressive seeing as the article is barely 24 hours old. Ryecatcher773 (talk) 15:10, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Normally the way to deal with lesser notable breweries is to redirect them to the town or city where they are based, per WP:LOCAL and WP:Breweries, however there are seventeen breweries in Chicago, and the Chicago article is crowded. There are sub-articles, such as Economy of Chicago, Culture of Chicago and Food manufacturers of Chicago. There is the potential for someone to create a section on the breweries of Chicago in one of those articles, and information on this brewery could be placed there. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 18:01, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The article has several citations from reliable sources that are not reviews. It meets WP:GNG. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 19:45, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Chicago Tribune newspaper articles provide sufficient depth of coverage to establish notability for this brewery. Chiswick Chap (talk) 21:34, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - it has reliable third-party sources, so is notable. Also suggest following WP:BEFORE, eg If the article was recently created, please consider allowing the contributors more time to develop the article. --Vclaw (talk) 23:34, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 20:28, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 20:28, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 20:28, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete: The range of sourcing seems to indicate notability issues in relation to WP:LOCAL. Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Primary criteria says: "The source's audience must also be considered. Evidence of attention by international or national, or at least regional, media is a strong indication of notability. On the other hand, attention solely from local media, or media of limited interest and circulation, is not an indication of notability; at least one regional, national, or international source is necessary." Though the Chicago Tribune is big enough that it also has national and regional circulation, it appears to me that all the sourcing seem to be the Tribune acting as the local Chicago paper. Is there evidence of coverage by non-Chicago sources? --Closeapple (talk) 03:49, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

By your rationale, that would essentially mean almost every microbrewery article should be deleted then. This is a brewery that just opened four months ago and hasn't had as much national (or international) exposure as say Bells or New Belgium. But it isn't some homebrewing operation out of someone's basement in rural Idaho, either. Regarding your citation concerns, yes, there are two sources not from Chicago: The Bellingham Herald and Rate Beer (which, whether or not you yourself are a beer person, is a largely recognized international site, particularly amongst those Wiki-users who are interested in the topic of microbreweries).Ryecatcher773 (talk) 18:05, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Though I have no interest in beer, this article is fairly well-documented, including references from newspapers far away from the subject's location, as well as the Chicago Tribune which is a regional paper. Moreover, the article is recently added - let it be fleshed out a bit more. If the article was recently created, please consider allowing the contributors more time to develop the article.Marikafragen (talk) 00:38, 3 May 2012 (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.