Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Sound Factory (bar)

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 -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 21:34, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Sound Factory (bar)

The Sound Factory (bar) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

NN Nick Catalano _contrib ^talk 08:15, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

• Strong keep This is a legendary nightclub; "this grand and remarkable club took on the status of myth, and joined the ranks of dance music’s most important places. Producers made records specifically for the Factory’s dancefloor, etc" [1]. There was no reason to even nominate this article, it just needs some improvement. Croxley 21:08, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

• Keep pending further references Based on the sole reference provided I'm willing to give the article some benefit of the doubt that, given a little time, it can be expanded with additional verifiable sources and information about the club. So my guess is to keep it for now, and if it hasn't significantly changed or expanded or it appears to be a one-source article then reconsider deletion in a couple months. Dugwiki 23:23, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

• Delete, only source cited is a blog, I can find no others. Fails WP:ATT (information based solely on an unreliable source). Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me Please review me!} 18:22, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Just a correction, the reference cited is a blog reprint of an article that is cited to have appeared in the published print magazine I-D. The referenced article therefore isn't just from a blog. Dugwiki 15:55, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

• Keep I found another source about the club here, though this story paints a much less rosy picture of the place.--Kubigula (talk) 21:38, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Thanks, Kub, that looks like it might be a second good reference for the article (it's a reprint of a published article about the place). Assuming some of the information from that source can be incorporated into the article, it would strengthen the claim to notability and also help clean up any potential bias in the current version (having only one reference might be leading to some biased language currently). Dugwiki 22:30, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

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.