Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Fox and Hounds

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. WjBscribe 01:12, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Fox and Hounds

The Fox and Hounds (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Definition of a pub name, that's it. Not much more can be said, since each pub with this name has an individual history and a different reason for using it. Masaruemoto 05:57, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

• Weak keep with a lot of expansion, including listing notable actual pubs, examples of their etymologies and photographs of them (especially their crests) would be helpful. In its current state, it's not worth keeping, but with lots of expansion it'd be worthy of keeping. --lincalinca 06:45, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. Describes an institution, if somewhat undercooked. digitalemotion 07:29, 2 November 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Digital Emotion (talk • contribs)
• Delete. Pubs called the Fox and Hounds have nothing in common except the name. Unless the name itself has notability/history to it (other than the obvious hunting reference) there is literally nothing to say. LeContexte 11:39, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
• keep and expand - IMHO an article on the name (which does have some notability/history to it) would be entirely appropriate. Artw 16:45, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete: While an article about the history of the name might be appropriate, this article ain't it. DCEdwards1966 20:16, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, this is not even among the top thirty pub names in the UK.[1] Any discussion of all the pubs using the name would essentially be a listing of loosely-connected topics. --Dhartung | Talk 23:39, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
  • That's a somewhat arbitrary decision, as "top thirty" or "bottom thirty" don't suddenly gain note, see WP:BIGGEST. The number of them doesn't consistute notability, the familiarity with it and its greater importance is. Though this article hasn't been expanded much in 5 years doesn't make it non-notable, it means editors haven't seen it as that. There's certainly due reason to include this article, expand and let it be noted. From a simple google search, you come up with at least 10 large pubs in the UK, and a US chain of bar and grill pubs. Though it doesn't scrape into the arbitrary decision of "top thirty" (from another artbitrary list of the top fifty names of pubs in the UK), it easily establishes notability on the broadness of its coverage. The tent's just thin right now. --lincalinca 07:18, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qst 17:21, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

• Delete - Inappropriate for wikipedia - WP:NOT an indiscriminate collection of information. The name is not in itself notable, and I fail to see how this could be made into an article of any relevance to anything whatsoever. No more bongos 17:27, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete A non-notable, unreference definition of a name. Reywas92^Talk 18:31, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
• Keep This is indeed a common pub name that has significant cultural history. While the individual pubs' reasons for choosing the names might be different and wholly unnotable (with some exceptions, perhaps), the origin of the name itself has some notability. The fact that the article is currently an unsourced stub is a surmountable problem that should not be given as a reason for deletion. LaMenta3 18:57, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - and/or redirect to Pub. No sources provided to establish notability, and though it might be a "common" name for pubs, it can be broken off from the main pub article if/when notability is demonstrated. Stubs (even unreferenced ones) are sometimes useful for encouraging expansion if no relevant article exists on the topic already, but that is not the case here. ◄Zahakiel► 19:02, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Three years old and still less than 30 words long? No potential for this to become anything more. Crazysuit 05:43, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - or at least create a new article, Etymology of British pub names or similar, and move into that (along with Red Lion (inn), and any similar articles that may be out there. I note that the most common pub name, The Crown, does not have an article. – Tivedshambo (talk) 16:00, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
• still Delete - and nb there is already a rather good article on Pub names. LeContexte 18:16, 9 November 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.