Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vendome (restaurant)

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:52, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Vendome (restaurant)

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

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

I prodded it with the following rationale: "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (companies) requirement. " It was deprodded by User:Necrothesp with the following rationale " one of the top 50 restaurants in the world is probably notable". Then User:SwisterTwister redirected it to Schloss Bensberg (historic building it is located in), which was again reverted by Necrothesp. I think a merge to that article would be a good idea. I don't see how this restaurant is independently notable. Claim that "The restaurant was voted 34th best in the world in Restaurant magazine's Top 50 2008" is backed up by a broken reference and other claims are simply unreferenced. Even if they can be referenced, I don't see what do those rankings have to do with notability. Unless there are reliable sources discussing those businesses, the most that such rankings can do is to provide a reference for some lists. We don't need two-sentence stand alone articles about restaurants that are just PR/marketing. As I discussed in my Signpost Op-Ed, this is a good example of Yellow-Pages like company spam. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:52, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:57, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:57, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. A Michelin 3-star restaurant[1] and widely described as one of the country's most important, multiple coverage in English and German is apparent in searches. [2] ("the epitome of modern German cuisine") [3][4]etc. --Arxiloxos (talk) 06:36, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Are those reliable sources of PR materials? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:54, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  - I can't help wondering why you're so desperate to get these articles deleted. Very odd indeed. They're recognised by their peers as among the best restaurants in the world, yet you really, really seem to despise articles on them as though they were the sort of puff piece created by someone about a minor band that nobody's ever heard of. In what possible way is this benefiting the project? -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:58, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    - @Necrothesp: I have nothing against them except I am worried about the Yellow Pages spam-like creep in this project. But clerly the recent discussions have demonstrated that the community considers at the very least that any restaurant with 1 or more Michelin stars is notable. Therefore I'd like to invite you to draft a paragraph to that account and add it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Common outcomes so that we can codify the consensus I am seeing here. I am not sure if there is consensus that without the star, inclusion in the Restaurant Top 50 guide is sufficient, however. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:29, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Michelin-starred restaurant. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:58, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The Michelin star is enough for notability, but expansion is needed. South Nashua (talk) 18:59, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep broken reference or lack of it in article not reason for deletion WP:NEXIST. this is top-rated restaurant in Germany, ranked 34th in world, recognized by peers and Michelin star, this is clearly notable, only not well sourced. And when searching of sources we must search in German also, also that's the main language where the subject exist –Ammarpad (talk) 19:52, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- best rated Michelin restaurant in Germany is a sufficient claim of significance, IMO. Here's some coverage: [http://www.bonviveur.es/restaurantes/vendome-el-templo-del-sabor-de-joachim-wissler "Vendôme, the taste temple of Joachim Wissler:

JWissler is one of the most creative chefs in Germany and one of the great masters of flavor, as demonstrated in his restaurant, Vendôme, in Bergisch Gladbach. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:50, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, notable enough, given its recognition by Michelin rating and by peers. Kierzek (talk) 14:56, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - sufficient notability has been established. Wikipedia has actual legitimate things to worry about that aren't "Yellow Pages spam-like creep" hiding under the project's bed. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 04:17, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Michelin 3-star is enough for notability--probably enough to say actually famous. It's the highest possible rating for a formal restaurant in what is the best-known international guide. I see we have articles on only about half of them; I suggest that the effort going into defending the promotional references for nondescript fast-food chains might be better used in write those 50 or so articles. DGG ( talk ) 23:25, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Best restaurant in the country, 3 Michelin stars since 2005, ranked consistently among the 50 best restaurants in the world since 2008, and all that and more can be backed up by sources. I have added a few. Sam Sailor 14:41, 9 December 2017 (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.