Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tango Café

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. Sandstein 18:18, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tango Café

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

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

Short-lived, non-notable local business. Orange Mike | Talk 05:07, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Tera TIX 05:33, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. Tera TIX 05:33, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Tera TIX 05:33, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Argentina-related deletion discussions. Tera TIX 05:33, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This was a little family-owned coffee shop that closed after nine years. Most of the eight sources are from local papers during a six-month period in 2008 regarding the shop's apparent impending closure after five years in business. Aside from the the person who created the article in 2013 (about a year after the business finally shut down), it really only has one meaningful content edit, with an interesting edit summary that makes a pretty good case for why the article should've been deleted a long time ago. 2605:A000:FFC0:D8:A85E:80D4:F289:EB3F (talk) 06:25, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:Corp; sourcing in article and online don't show that it's notable enough for inclusion. JC7V-talk 06:27, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete non-notable local business that doesn't have the coverage to pass WP:GNG, and never will as it's now defunct. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:17, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep because the business received significant coverage from a variety of publications and journalists in a large city during it's existence, evidencing its importance. True, it is unlikely to be expanded further because the business has closed, but that doesn't negate the fact that it was, at one time, notable. Sionk (talk) 12:06, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The articles has sources from the Pittsburgh Post Gazette and Pittsburgh Tribune, which are local newspapers, and a couple from The Jewish Chronicle. This isn't "significant coverage" as required by WP:GNG. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:06, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Quite clearly it's significant independent reliable coverage, the one moot question is whether it's too 'local' for WP:NCORP. My opinion is that it is broad enough. Sionk (talk) 14:23, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Joseph2302, you wikilinked to the wrong Jewish Chronicle. It should be The Jewish Chronicle of Pittsburgh, not the unrelated Jewish Chronicle in London, England. So, yes, all the sources for this coffee shop are local publications. And, Sionk, as WP:NCORP explains, "attention solely from local media, or media of limited interest and circulation, is not an indication of notability; at least one regional, statewide, provincial, national, or international source is necessary". It also notes examples of trivial coverage, which includes "the opening or closing of local branches, franchises, or shops", which (its expected closing) is precisely what 7 of the 8 sources are about. 2605:A000:FFC0:D8:A85E:80D4:F289:EB3F (talk) 16:45, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:15, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I don't think it is very notable, though it was on local newspaper several times. Especially that the business closed in 2012 and that it was only open for 9 years, there's not much you can add to it. --Atomicdragon136 (talk) 16:22, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 21:56, 11 November 2018 (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.