Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kroger (Ponce de Leon Ave.)

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~~ merge to Ponce de Leon Avenue. —Darkwind (talk) 06:56, 27 September 2013 (UTC) Edit: A merger was performed before the AfD was closed, but that fact was not mentioned after discussion, making the de facto outcome merge instead of delete. This AfD did not address the suitability of the content to be included in a broader article, and I have restored the article history for licensing compliance. —Darkwind (talk) 23:23, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kroger (Ponce de Leon Ave.)

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

Previously deleted via AfD under the name Murder Kroger first part of this year. CSD declined since the article was rewritten incorporating references to the murder and death that occurred. However none of the material is new. All was available last time. While I'm sure some locals call it Murder Kroger, it just doesn't seem to rise to the level of notability to justify a stand alone article on the store. Caffeyw (talk) 14:03, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The previous deletion was for a WP:NEO. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Murder Kroger. To quote one of the delete votes there: "If there were reputable local mainstream sources (AJC, TV/radio station websites, newspaper archives, etc.), even just a few of them, that would be enough in my opinion. As Ten Pound Hammer has pointed out, there are not enough credible sources to establish this article." Now we have 10 citations to The Atlanta Journal-Constitution (AJC). Per WP:CHAIN, which doesn't normally encourage franchise articles, we have sufficient detailed coverage to establish a coherent article about the store. The "nickname" just makes the proposed DYK hook fun. Biosthmors (talk) 14:45, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 15:21, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Georgia-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 15:21, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 15:21, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete does not meet notability requirements. Ridiculous.97.85.208.225 (talk) 16:50, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Wikipedia:Places of local interest says: "It may be considered that if enough attributable information exists about the subject to write a full and comprehensive article about it, it may make sense for the subject to have its own article. If some source material is available, but is insufficient for a comprehensive article, it is better to mention the subject under the article for its parent locality." In this case, the parent locality is clearly Ponce de Leon Avenue. So is Wikipedia served better by having a separate article for this store, or should we merge the content into the article about the street? I think a separate article makes more sense. But in either of these cases, keep or merge, there's no need for an AfD discussion. Biosthmors (talk) 15:53, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I see no significant coverage of this individual Kroger store that would justify an article about it. Local news outlets mention grocery store openings and locations where crimes get committed. Kroger has thousands of stores and all are mentioned occasionally in local papers. The Bank of America branch I go to has been robbed three times in ten years. Is that branch notable? Not in my book. There was a terrible gang shootout 20 years ago at a McDonald's I pass by regularly. Not notable. Much of the content is about competitors in the neighborhood, not this store. And since when do we link to a video of a song by a non-notable band as a reference? I just don't get it. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:11, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- User:Cullen328, the article doesn't establish notability based upon the crime. Primary sources are allowed if used with care, which has been done. You're saying the sourced content shouldn't even be merged to the parent article? Biosthmors (talk) ^{please add [[User:Biosthmors]] to your signed reply} 17:36, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Biosthmors, I see nothing worth merging. You could say "There is a Kroger store at intersection X" in the article about the street. It is nothing more than another one of hundreds of thousands of individual supermarkets all over the world. The chain is clearly notable. In my view, an individual store would need to have much more in-depth coverage beyond routine store opening news, renovation rumors and passing mentions in the local crime blotter in order to justify inclusion in this encyclopedia. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:04, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cullen328, interesting. Am I missing something fundamental about Wikipedia? Bear with me a minute, if you will. Because I have in my mind a "featured" version of the Ponce de Leon Avenue article. And imagine we had featured and longer Clermont Lounge, Ponce City Market, and Ford Motor Company Assembly Plant (Atlanta), articles. They're all right there along Ponce. I imagine each establishment along the road would get a section at the street article, and would be adopted WP:SS there, with a {{Main article}} link. What's wrong with that vision? Biosthmors (talk) ^{please add [[User:Biosthmors]] to your signed reply} 18:13, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
In other words, what's the determining characteristic of buildings that deserve coverage at the street article? Are chain establishments not worth discussing, simply because they're chains? Biosthmors (talk) ^{please add [[User:Biosthmors]] to your signed reply} 18:21, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing wrong with your overall vision, Biosthmors, with regards to the street article, and the three other places you mentioned, all of which appear notable to me, though the strip club article needs work. Each notable establishment could have a brief section. However, you have not convinced me that this individual Kroger is notable. It could be mentioned in the street article, I suppose, but does not deserve its own article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:29, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Cullen328 for the discussion. Well, you may already understand my position well, but just to be clear for everyone: I'm arguing that many stand-alone chain stores may be notable. The determining threshold for notability is just a practical matter. Can one find enough details in independent sources to actually craft a coherent stand-alone article? I think I've done that. And I think that is the fundamental intent behind WP:CHAIN. Biosthmors (talk) ^{please add [[User:Biosthmors]] to your signed reply} 19:08, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your argument doesn't seem to be based on the actual wording of the notability guideline WP:CHAIN, but rather on what you might wish it to be. Here's the actual wording:

"Many companies have chains of local stores or franchises that are individually pretty much interchangeable—for instance, a local McDonald's. Since there is generally very little to say about individual stores or franchises that is not true for the chain in general, Wikipedia should not have articles on such individual stores. In rare cases, an individual location will have architectural peculiarities that makes it notable, such as the Shell Service Station (Winston-Salem, North Carolina) or the McDonald's (Will Rogers Turnpike); however, a series of articles on every single Wal-Mart in China would not be informative. An exception can be made if a major event occurred at a local store; however, this would most likely be created under an article name that describes the event, not the location (see San Ysidro McDonald's massacre for an example)."

All we've got in this case is a few non-notable crimes over 22 years, routine services, competitors, a false renovation rumor, mention of a bunch of competitors, and a couple of shout-outs of a nickname. Where's the architectural or historical significance due to a major event? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:21, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, thanks, and I'm arguing that what's there amounts to much more than the the general case where there is "very little to say". And don't forget the the $1.5 million dollar investment, the song, and the loans that the source implies catalyzed the formation of the store in the 1980s. It adds up, in my opinion. =) I don't think WP:CHAIN offers an exhaustive list of examples that can establish notability. Biosthmors (talk) ^{please add [[User:Biosthmors]] to your signed reply} 19:38, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete A business in a major metropolitan area has a lot of crime? You don't say. --BDD (talk) 17:03, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - nothing of substance there; not even a BLP1E level of substance. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:07, 16 September 2013 (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.