Talk:Luna Lounge

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

from VfD:

A bar in New York. Doesn't establish notability, except to say that there's a foosball table and that it might get demolished soon. Wikipedia is not the yellow pages or a bar guide. [[User:Premeditated Chaos|PMC]] 01:44, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

  • Delete. Non-notable. [[User:Livajo|Ливай | ☺]] 02:08, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete, although it is apparently a fairly well-known bar in the area [1]. Even so, not notable enough. --Spangineer ∞ 02:38, Dec 17, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete - either non-notable, or reason for notability not mentioned in article. - Andre Engels 03:00, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep, because. Wyss 03:22, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete --fvw* 03:36, 2004 Dec 17 (UTC)
  • Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, abstaining for now. —[[User:Radman1|RaD Man (talk)]] 03:47, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Even "Luna Lounge" -nyack -foosball gets 465 Usenet hits, many naming the lounge in the subject and/or familiarly. Comedians and comedy writers are advised to go thence to get discovered. Keep as culturally notable. Samaritan 03:53, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. [[User:Rhymeless|Rhymeless | (Methyl Remiss)]] 07:18, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Nothing notable. If it stays, I'll list all my local pubs! P Ingerson 07:46, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete - one of thousands, potential advertising - Skysmith 08:11, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Man, I'm really good at foosball! But delete. Jacob1207 16:49, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Very marginal keep here. [[User:GRider|GRider\talk]] 16:59, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Public establishments are "notable".--Centauri 22:36, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete: It's a bar that has performers in NYC, but it's not Danceteria or Knitting Factory. If you're in NYC, you might have heard of it. If you're not in NYC, you will not have heard of it. Therefore, it is of only local interest. Geogre 23:17, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. More or less notable. Dr Zen 07:44, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Less notable to my eyes. Indrian 06:26, Dec 19, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Somebody in the WWW 06:29, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • abstain. This is a notable place, there probably should be an article about Luna Lounge, but it needs to have more content than is in its current iteration. It can always be recreated later if someone wants to write more. Gsd97jks 02:11, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

end moved discussion

Update and Postscript, 2008: The test of time shows it was right to keep the article. I'm a San Francisco professor who turned here looking for background information on a certain rock group. It helped. And Sarah Silverman has become extremely noteworthy, in the years since this was written. The article helps us picture her early career. One winces at the foosball table remark, but it's better to err on the side of caution and not cut articles, it seems. Profhum (talk) 04:52, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Citing Sources

While I understand Anonymous57's urge to make the Wiki citable, there is a great deal in this world that is verifiable but not citable. City guides, innumerable articles of no individual special merit, and the day to day experience of 8 million New Yorkers and a few thousand bands are sufficient, in my opinion, to support the reality and details of the Luna Lounge, as is the sourced weblink. The simple act of jotting down what thousands have already experienced does not constitute original research. In general, the history of the recent is often unwritten, and yet easy to check on, and appropriate for the Wiki.
Unless there are reasonable objections to the contrary, I'm going to remove the unsourced tag, which I think is misapplied and irrelevant here and in similar contexts. - Corporal Tunnel 18:35, 2 October 2006 (UTC)