Talk:Elephants Delicatessen

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sources[edit]

---Another Believer (Talk) 18:43, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Another Believer: Here are a few articles that discuss Elephants Deli as a business:
  • Newberry, Kerry (January 1, 2018). "When Elephants Fly". Edible Portland - B the Change. Retrieved 2019-03-14. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |dead-url= (help)
  • local audience.
  • in a press release from a restaurant related solutions vendor. In other words, sounding their own bullhorn.
  • local audience.
...and here's a shout-out from a travel column in the NYT (but it's not in-depth coverage):
  • trivial mention within a list. nothing of notability establishing material.

Graywalls (talk) 14:33, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notability[edit]

@Deb: Regardless of article/draft quality, based on secondary coverage (not just what's listed immediately above), do you have any thoughts on whether or not Elephants Delicatessen is a notable chain? ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:28, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It may well be, but the article needs to demonstrate that. It's not enough to say on the Talk page that there are plenty of sources or that the chain is notable; you need to make the claim in the article and explain why. Deb (talk) 19:34, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Deb, Thanks for weighing in. I guess I was just trying to get a sense of whether or not you felt the topic was notable based on secondary coverage, which is what we discuss at AfD. ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:35, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
With most of the sources you've listed above, it is difficult to say whether they are truly independent. Local publications and directories often give free advertising to local businesses and such coverage as they do give is rarely "significant". Deb (talk) 19:39, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Graywalls: Bringing this discussion to your attention as well. Have you had a chance to review sourcing of this chain, and do you have thoughts on notability based on coverage (setting aside the quality of the current draft)? ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:44, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look into it. Graywalls (talk) 16:33, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Another Believer:, I decided to solicit outside input on the interpretation of notability for companies. For now, I don't know. Oh, well, heh. Graywalls (talk) 17:04, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Graywalls, Oh well? You nominate a page for deletion but then don't care about whether or not the topic has sufficient secondary coverage? ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:06, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm checking on the audience coverage. Chill out. I'm not worked up or antsy about it as you're. I don't understand why you have such a sense of urgency over everything like this is life and death matter. Graywalls (talk) 17:30, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Graywalls, I don't think this is urgent or a life/death matter, rest assured. ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:33, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Another Believer: I'm awaiting on some input on the business notability talk page hoping to get some input that is helpful for the future too. Graywalls (talk) 03:06, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • (From WT:ORG). A large portion of the above sources remain brief, local, sometimes promotional coverage (a Zagat listing obviously does not contribute to notability). Several are routine local business news blurbs reporting on basic openings of locations or generic reviews by the local paper that critiques most dining establishments. It not obvious that even these sources together pass NCORP. However due to the presence of many locations and the Unique Eats book's claim, somewhat corroborated by the other links, that it's "A Portland mainstay for almost too many reasons to count", I do think this business is indeed notable and could be moved to the mainspace, provided that notability is actually asserted in the article. It should demonstrate why it's notable, rather than assume that because it exists and because local sources give it routine coverage it's automatically notable. The considered CSD was not entirely unwarranted. Reywas92Talk 20:13, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Reywas92, Thanks. The above sourcing is not meant to be an exhaustive list of available references, just a very quick and easy list I compiled based on a Google search. Surely there are more Oregonian articles to incorporate via Google News or the archives at the library. Agree to disagree on the CSD being appropriate, but regardless, thanks for weighing in here and confirming your thoughts re: notability. ---Another Believer (Talk) 20:20, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This article has survived AfD. Any opposition to me archiving this discussion? ---Another Believer (Talk) 18:38, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

While the article survived AfD, the point that Deb made three years ago at the start of the thread still stands. The article makes no claim of notability, as it should per WP:SPEAKSELF. Therefore, I don't see the thread as resolved. In any case, this talk page is not exactly long - 9kb whereas WP:ARCHIVE suggests thinking about archiving when the page reaches 75kb, so I don't see any need to archive it. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 10:52, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
OK! Thanks, ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:21, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kruse Way closure[edit]

---Another Believer (Talk) 18:37, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Best of Portland 2022[edit]

---Another Believer (Talk) 13:23, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Elephants_Delicatessen&oldid=1196712641"