Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/El Dorado Kitchen

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. (non-admin closure)Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 12:59, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

advertising The Banner talk 05:16, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I'm inherently bias as I'm the person who wrote the article. I have no conflict of interest with this restaurant, aside from eating there previously. As with all the restaurant articles I write, this is following guidelines developed through Wikiproject food and drink and finds inspiration in other articles about restaurants including Ben's Chili Bowl and The Fat Duck which are both GA's in our project. Anyway, if you're concerned about the reception section feel free to c/e. It's based on citations and I tried to cover all sides of the story. I'm totally comfortable with that section being gutted. I don't think this merits this nomination though. The restaurant passes WP:GNG. Missvain (talk) 05:23, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- What I see is a long list of positive reviews and no indication of rewards (like Michelin stars or others). The Banner talk 10:23, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi The Banner! They don't have a Michelin star of any kind. I was unable to figure out how to do the awards stuff in that regard, I'm unsure on what other awards they have that would fit into things. If you actually read the review section you'll see the Foder's score. You will also see discusses about minor glitches in the service, disappointing dishes, poor frying of fritto misto, and the review from The Press Democrat called it "pocked with hits and misses," so perhaps if you actually read it, this isn't all smelling like roses :) They also have an overpriced wine list - which is totally true. I actually had a beer there recently and even commented to the bartender how I was "shocked" at how expensive the beer I ordered was. But, I'm not writing reviews for major newspapers :) I welcome improvements to the article of course! One thing I have learned - it's fully cited and the content that is in that section discusses what is in the reviews. I can spend time to find more reviews, but I got really burnt out on writing the article. Missvain (talk) 16:45, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep As above. J 1982 (talk) 16:38, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

note to closing admin J 1982 (talk · contribs) has made a spree of 23 identical keep as above !votes in 29 minutes. LibStar (talk) 12:26, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:03, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:03, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:03, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Listed by Michelin's, Zagat, and Frommer's; several significant reviews from Independent Reliable Sources of regional impact. This meets my understanding of WP:GNG. --MelanieN (talk) 21:59, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Just being listed means nothing towards notability. The Banner talk 22:44, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This article has prose, and it has references that correctly cite the prose. The article may be promotional, but as this policy says, Consider whether you actually want the article to be merged, expanded, or cleaned up rather than deleted, and use the appropriate mechanism instead of AfD. My meaning is that the article could be cleaned up or expanded, instead of having to be deleted. Brandon (MrWooHoo) • Talk to Brandon! 02:18, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- I just consider it advertising and want to get rid of it. I am not interested in undermining the Wikipedia-stance that Wikipedia is not for advertising. The Banner talk 09:09, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Yeah, the article is kind of adverty but the restaurant is notable. I'm not meaning to pick on MissVain here, but she has a style of writing about restaurants that comes across as promotion. I don't think that's her intention. I had a similar reaction to that of The Banner with a similar article she created a few weeks ago. This article should evolve and stay.

To that end, I've moved what I believe is the contentious bit to the talk page for discussion and if appropriate, restoration in part or totality. The Dissident Aggressor 16:51, 20 August 2014 (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.