Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mitra Samaja

Mitra Samaja

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Mitra Samaja (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

fails WP:PROMO. Non notable restaurant in India with passing mentions in travel articles about cuisine is all it can muster. DBigXrayᗙ 21:11, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. DBigXrayᗙ 21:12, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. DBigXrayᗙ 21:12, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Mitra Samaj is the sourced name. Page was named with a less known name but I retitled the name as you see Mitra Samaj is supported by the sources. This is a notable restaurant and has got sufficient coverage by reliable sources like Penguin UK, The Hindu, Outlook India, NDTV, Times Now, NDTV, and that is on the top of my head. The way you are trying to involve this restaurant in your childish fights with me should be beyond anyone who has a mature mind. -- NavjotSR (talk) 13:07, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Comment Canvassing here valereee (talk) 17:13, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Allowed by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion#After_nominating:_Notify_interested_projects_and_editors NavjotSR (talk) 09:50, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

• Comment These sources listed above only have passing mention (see analysis in the table below), these sources only serve to verify that this restaurant exists. To claim notability significant coverage is needed. If newspapers and media dont consider it notable enough to publish an article on the restaurant, why should we expect Wikipedia to do this and promote the restaurant. --DBigXrayᗙ 18:58, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Source assessment table:

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Penguin UK The Penguin Food Guide to India		reliable publisher	has just a one line passing mention of eatery recommendation in the city article without elaborating on the subject directly or in detail	✘ No
The Hindu, In search of Udupi sambar,		newspaper	2 line mention of the restaurant in a recipe article about "Udupi sambar" dish.	✘ No
Outlook India, The eponymous town in Karnataka probably gave India its first culinary brand		newsmagazine	a statement from the owner and a 2 line mention of the restaurant in a recipe article about "Udupi sambar" dish.	✘ No
NDTV, A Walk Down Memory Lane		newschannel	3 line mention of the restaurant	✘ No
NDTV, 6 Dishes from Udupi Every South Indian Food Lover Must Try			2 line mention of the restaurant	✘ No
Times Now, Independence Day 2018		news channel	1 line mention of the restaurant	✘ No
Rediff news, In Udupi, food is the greatest binder	interview of the owner, see WP:PRIMARY	news site	interview cannot be used to claim SIGCOV.	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

--DBigXrayᗙ 18:58, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

You first claimed that the subject is a "PROMO" and no one mentions the restaurant except travel articles. Now you claim now that a subject needs to be named at least 1000 times on a page then it would become notable? You are talking absurd. These reliable sources have dedicated more than 200 words to describe the restaurant, that is "significant coverage". I would expect administrators not to fall for your dishonesty. NavjotSR (talk) 09:50, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

• Delete per above unless better sources turn up. Catrìona (talk) 06:28, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Are you taking words of User:DBigXray only because he spends more time on Wikipedia than I do? NavjotSR (talk) 09:50, 2 January 2019 (UTC)