Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Regent Cinemas

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. --Core desat 04:33, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regent Cinemas

Two cinemas with sixteen screens; article unreferenced and reads very much like promotional material (eg, a section on the "Seniors' Gold Club"), only nontrivial coverage I could find was a human-interest story from a local paper. Eleland 20:48, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No evidence of notability - looks like spam. MarkinBoston 21:31, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per very narrow scope of notability. Corpx 23:17, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Small, but notable cinema chain, and runs the historically significant Regent Cinema in Ballarat. Rebecca 01:46, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment How do you figure? All I could Google was a trivial mention by a local historian on a website which is funded by the city. I'm sure it's a lovely 1930s building, but we need objective evidence of its' notability - you can find a good print source maybe? Eleland 13:56, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Google isn't research. If you must delete it, then do it - but you're deleting something that is actually notable, and for which sources could easily be found if someone bothered to actually research instead of making assumptions out of thin air. Rebecca 04:44, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rebecca, notability must be proved. A subject isn't "assumed notable unless you can prove otherwise". —gorgan_almighty 12:19, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rebecca, I asked you how you knew it was notable. Instead of sour grapes, can you provide sources which imply notability? You say they could easily be found - can you find them for us? Eleland 12:34, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Doesn't seem to be subject of any reliable secondary sources as required by WP:N. —gorgan_almighty 12:52, 28 August 2007 (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.