Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nolet Het Reymerswale

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The result was Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) S_peakF_ree ^(talk)_(contribs) 01:34, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nolet Het Reymerswale

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

Non-notable restaurant for English Wikipedia. Most sources are in dutch. Tinton5 (talk) 02:29, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There is no specific notability page for restaurants; however, this article is well sourced and it appears like it meets WP:GNG through coverage in sources. Remember that existence of sources are required; however, access to sources is not required so the fact that most sources are in Dutch is irrelevant. See WP:SOURCEACCESS and WP:NONENG. Furthermore, this restaurant was awarded a star by the Michelin Guide. This is not bestowed upon many restaurants and could be considered an honor (also conferring notability). Ryan Vesey Review me! 02:39, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep A restaurant holding a Michelin star run of the mill, I don't think so. About the Dutch sources: are you familiar with WP:NONENG and WP:GNG (states: Sources are not required to be available online, and they are not required to be in English.) and WP:ORG (States in the footnotes: Inclusion in "best of", "top 100", and similar lists generally does not count towards notability, unless the list itself is so notable that each entry can be presumed notable. Examples of the latter include the Fortune 500 or a Michelin Guide to restaurants.)? Night of the Big Wind _talk 02:51, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Not exactly sure what the criteria are for eating establishments, but a Michelin star restaurant I would have thought must be sufficiently notable? --Legis (talk - contribs) 03:03, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 05:22, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 05:22, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Not notable for "English" wikipedia? Fuck that, English is a worthy language for everything that's notable, if we can get a passable article written. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/L'Auberge (restaurant) for the Michelin discussion and history of those AfDs.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 05:27, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The fact that a restaurant was awarded a Michelin star for 25 years or more creates a very strong presumption of notability. In my opinion, an AfD nominator, in a case such as this, should be expected to explain in great detail the unique circumstances that led to a restaurant receiving such a prestigious award for so many years yet otherwise failing to to achieve notability. Such an explanation should include an understanding of the significance of a Michelin star. Warning - this will be a very difficult challenge. As to the reliance on reliable Dutch language sources, please be aware that they are just as acceptable as English language sources. Thanks also to Milowent for the history lesson. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:29, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: There is Google Translate. [1], [2], [3] (all about the closure), [4] (news article), [5] (is in a travel guide, but it is still an actual review), and there is likely more. SL93 (talk) 22:47, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Withdraw Nomination I was unaware of the guidelines provided. Now I will be more careful when nominating for the future. I am now in the process of withdrawing this and end this hassle. Thank you all. Tinton5 (talk) 23:38, 14 December 2011 (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.