Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rhodell Brewery

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 no consensus. - Mailer Diablo 06:50, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rhodell Brewery

adSPAMverCRUFTisement; weak or no claims to notability; has only been around 8 years Rklawton 02:37, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Weak Delete — maybe if it grows, it will make it, but for now, delete American Patriot 1776 02:47, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete — Unless some notability and importance could be established per WP:CORP. Crossmr 03:45, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete; it sounds cool, but it would need independent sources to stay. Melchoir 04:48, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep: (Note: I'm the author of this) This is a verifiable commercial brewery. If we keep towns, no matter how small, why not keep commercial breweries? There are far fewer of them in the world than there are towns. I realize sources are lacking in the current version, yet google results seem to reveal multiple independant mentions of this topic. Why not give it time to develop? Friday (talk) 05:30, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  • 'Keep. Please refer to the list of references in the article. TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 07:06, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep or Merge. Appears on the BeerAdvocate index and RateBeer index, fulfilling criterion (2) of WP:CORP. 8 years is not an "only" in the modern world of brewing. If it's too short to be an independent article, merge it into Illinois_beer_and_breweries. --Stlemur 07:26, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Criterion 2 of WP:CORP is for stock market indexes, not for web sites that give quality ratings to breweries. Criterion 1 is what you are looking for. You'll need something more substantial than an article that just gives the address of the brewery and a list of the beers that it produces. An independent history of the brewery would satisfy the criterion, for example. There are books about breweries. Uncle G 09:31, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. Well sourced and "Rhodell's is the only brewery in Illinois to offer brew on premises, in which customers brew their own beer, under supervision of the brewmaster." makes it a unique and thus notable brewery in my opinion. - Mgm|(talk) 08:49, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment Just about anything or anyone as hyper-qualified as you note in your analysis will end up being unique. Mine is the only house on the corner of the south side of my street. So what? Rklawton 17:54, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Weak delete - if it gave some references other than rating sites and an alumni magazine it could establish notability. When (as already stated) there are far fewer breweries than towns, being the only brewery in Illinois to offer brew on premises doesn't make it notable (only one in the world may be notable, but this isn't). Yomanganitalk 10:58, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, breweries are notable. BoojiBoy 13:29, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  • No vote yet. It is unclear from the linked sites I visited whether this is a local (micro)brewery (i.e. its beers are available off premises) or just a brewpub/restaurant that offers brew-on-premises. Would be inclined to keep it if it is a local brewery. Not sure that an individual brewpub/restaurant meets the grade, though. - Smerdis of Tlön 14:10, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  • It'd be better if we had a source for that rather than my own tasty but original research, but yes, this beer is distributed as well. Not sure how MUCH they distribute, if that matters, but it can be found at other bars and restaurants. The brewery itself is a brewpub (i.e. their products are available packaged but are also served on the premises.) They do not have a kitchen. I'll admit I was a bit questionable about making this- I wouldn't be in favor of articles on every corner bar in the world. But since they're a licensed commercial brewery, I figured this put them in a different category. There'd been discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Beer and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Beer/Notability Criteria on notability of individual breweries, but nothing I'd call a clear consensus. If you're inclined to say (as some did in the discussion) that any licensed commercial brewery is significant, this one clearly counts. If you want some level of third-party sources, well, they are some, but I don't know if there's enough to clearly show the significance of this. Friday (talk) 14:19, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Inclined to keep in that case. Good to know that notability is being discussed in the beer project, and tend to agree: the garden variety brewpub-restaurant is common enough to require further indicia of notability, but local breweries that distribute ought to make the cut. (For a fact like this, the menu or beer list of another restaurant serving this brewery's beer would be an independent, non-self-published source reliable enough to establish this fact, I think.) - Smerdis of Tlön 15:32, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Works for me. Successful breweries have it in their nature to tend to notability. - Corporal Tunnel 16:49, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Question, and so I don't muddy AfD's up with more brewery articles. Are all commercial breweries notable? And if not, what would disqualify a commercial brewery from notability? Rklawton 00:34, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
      • That very question has been kicked around a bit at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Beer/Notability Criteria. Guidelines that try to say "all things of type X are automatically notable" are rather silly, even tho we do that in cases of towns as a convenience. We could make up rules based on how many barrels per year they produce, but I don't think we need to- isn't what we're looking for really just proper sources? I've remember reading a newpaper article about this place, but I believe it was from several years ago and I'm unable to turn it up online, but I suppose I don't expect people to just take my word for it that there are better sources available. The main reason I don't see a need for a specific standard for breweries is that I don't see vanity brewery articles usually clogging up Afd. I'll admit the closest thing we have to a relevant guideline is WP:CORP which this almost certainly fails, but I'm admittedly biased on favor of things that are delicious. Friday (talk) 01:28, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
      • I'm a beer fan myself. Given the lack of clarity, then it seems like WP:CORP is our best guideline. If not, then there's nothing to stop Wikipedia from becoming a brew pub directory - and from lots of other similar sized restaurants, etc. claiming "equal" notability. As far as brew-pubs go, any city with a pub is going to get a local newspaper write-up, so that's hardly notable. To prevent that, I'd like to suggest that the brew or the pub should first win at least one major award before meeting Wikipedia's notability requirements. "X-city's best" by some newspaper award, probably wouldn't count (at least not for a Peoria sized city). Other ideas? Rklawton 01:42, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
        • I could try to assert that breweries are of particular cultural significance but that's just my own opinion which shouldn't count for much. My general standard for all articles involve the subject being covered in an appropriate number of independant sources. I don't personally see a need for specific standards for breweries, altho expecting some significant award doesn't seem unreasonable to me either. Please do pop in at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Beer/Notability Criteria if you wish. So far this Afd seems to confirm what I'd suspected- that articles on commercial breweries and unlikely to be deleted via Afd, but this is the first practical test of brwery notability that I'm aware of. Friday (talk) 16:01, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, it looks fine to me, and verifiable. RFerreira 19:12, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep per discussion above. --badlydrawnjeff talk 11:02, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: for those who like having our own standards for significance rather than relying on expert opinion, there's one factor that might make this brewery somewhat unique, at least in its locale: they serve cask ale, which, as far as I have seen, isn't available at places like Goose Island Brewery. It's probably quite common in England tho, so maybe this doesn't count for much. Friday (talk) 21:43, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. It's a small business of no notability. That it makes beer seems to be the only reason why people are voting to keep it. I am a beer advocate. But I see no sense in listing every corner shop, bus stop, milk farm and brewery on the planet. The rules of Wiki are that an entry must be verifiable - that is the item must have been written about in an approved source. A listing in a phone book or collectors directory does not count. If RateBeer had an article on the brewery that would be of interest. But they merely list the brewery - along with every brewery on the planet! BalfourCentre 23:07, 25 August 2006 (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.