So; here's where you can whine (oops - I meant discuss) about what I'm doing here ;-)

Yes, well, what are you doing here ? http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gokkun&diff=next&oldid=45615330 DanielDemaret 13:28, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm confused - the comparison implies I removed stuff - I did NOT do anything but add my comment - if I'd wanted to pull stuff off it would be the pic, not someone's argument for keeping it. Is there a tech authority here who can look into this?Bridesmill 13:59, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Right, as I said on the page, it was just a software glitch. It happened to me once and had me listed as doing various vandalisms. I reported it to the bug people but I don't think that you should - it's just a glitch, I guess, that comes up now and again, it's probably over by now. Herostratus 21:48, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up. The Kalendar Koffee House page probably isn't a speedy candidate since the duplicate has gone up on AFD. The user has been spamming and trying to use the 'pedia for advertising for a couple of weeks - you seem to have seen the Coffeehouse page already - and though the 'company' page could probably be construed as a speedy candidate itself (a different version was already speedied), I wanted to make sure that there was a consensus behind deleting in the hope of preventing further reposting. There is a means for posting similar pages under a single AFD vote, which I would've tried to do had I known of the duplicate at the time the first went up. Given that it's been a couple of days, though, I'd rather put it up for a separate vote just to be on the safe side. --DMG413 16:16, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• • Deleting Kalendar from the coffee house category is wrong. To claim that Kalendar is advertising is also incorrect.

The Kalendar article lists date of opening and location with interior photo. The so called "vanity" aspects have been removed from the article. Kalendar may not be as "noteable" as the larger chains, but that should not preclude it from listing in the coffee house category. To call this article spam would be to call all listings in this category spam. The previous AFD article was edited down to be considered for inclusion - tis all. No harm intended. This on the other hand is the opening paragraphs of the Starbucks listing. I imagine that all listings in this category are similar to this.

Starbucks NASDAQ: SBUX (SEHK: 4337), is a large multinational chain of coffee shops, often serving pastries, popular in the US especially among students and young urban professionals. The corporate headquarters are in Seattle, Washington. The company was in part named after Starbuck, a character in Moby-Dick, and its insignia is a stylized cartoon Siren. According to the company's fact sheet, as of February 2006, Starbucks had 6,216 company-operated outlets worldwide: 5,028 of them in the United States and 1,188 in other countries and U.S. territories. In addition, the company has 4,585 joint-venture and licensed outlets, 2,633 of them in the United States and 1,952 in other countries and U.S. territories.

By definition most of the listings in the coffee house category are "non-notable". In fact the majority of the listings are not known outside the constituency where they are established. Being "non-notable" has always been a difficult area for editors. In this instance for example, the band Pursuit of Happiness wrote a song and video about Kalendar (1996 Kalendar/Gretzky Rocks/In Praise Of (T.W.A.-The World's Address). This by definition makes Kalendar a noteable entity by Wikipedia standards see Wikipedia:Notability "A topic has notability if it is known outside of a narrow interest group or constituency, or should be because of its particular importance or impact". EllisCHanna 04:21, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

• Unfortunately, now the articles are BAI - one liners only. Bridesmill can read, and yes, there are other coffeshops out there that prob don't belong. Starbucks & Tim's *& Cafe du monde etc are notable - Kalendar is not. The fact that the user who put it up does nothing significant on Wiki besides promote the business they own makles it in Wiki's view & mine spam & self-promotion. One of the reasons Bridesmill Studio doesn't have a page (although hopefully someone will put it up ;-)I'm an inclusionist, but I cannot stand disengenuous behaviour. Bridesmill 04:51, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• The image should stay in the article. There is not another interior photo of a "French Style Cafe" in the article, therefore this a highly relevant image. Claiming that the image is vanity/spam/corp is nonsense and an invalid arguement. The image adheres to WP:NPOV standards. Separately the Kalendar Koffee House article has been RFD. I agreed with the arguement made regarding Chains, and have removed the listing on the Coffee House Chains page. The RFD outcome should not reflect on this page. As editors you must not allow your emotions to influence your choices. If you allow the image to be removed then must reflect on the reasons why. None of the reason given for removal of the image are sound or reasonable ones.EllisCHanna 12:44, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

• As Ellis' partner in Kalendar I wanted to add my part to this discussion. I completely understand the arguements made for the references and articles in the coffee house chains page Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kalendar Koffee House. I can see how Wikipedia could become full of advertising style information weakening the references made available in this valuable living encycodedia. I expressed concerns to my partner about that section from the start. But I also saw the possibility of a fit because ultimately it is a section listing businesses with their styles and descriptions. Now the pages that offer descriptions of cafes and coffee houses have excellent written references describing very accurately in words what these are. But the pictures are obviously less effective. It was this section that we were first drawn to. Each section, with the exception of section 2, has one or two picture references as I have reviewed:

Intro Coffee House - One photo simple image reference. 1. History - two great reference images

2. Contemporary coffeehouses -no images as references (actually I think a Starbucks image would work well here - being an icon of the coffee movement of the 21 century- creating a whole new direction in coffeehouses again)

3. Contemporary cafés

The article on contemporary cafes is then highlighted with one image identified as: "A coffee shop in Ireland. There is no outside seating due to unsuitable weather." I assume this was used originally due to lack of any usable cafe images. The photograph could be depicting a bike repair shop or pub or any number of retail stores from its appearance, and lends no further descriptive relevance to this section. We are just suggesting, that as it appears, each catagory under Coffee Houses has a picture reference (with the acception of section 2), the triptych we have added offers a much stronger contibution to the contemporary cafe article, versus the ubiquitous corner coffee sandwich joint that appears to be represented (I appologize if this is actually a famous Irish quirky cafe that I do not know about.)

4. Cannabis coffee shops. The Bull Dog image is perfect. This is very well known coffee house for this section.

I hope this helps define our arguement for keeping this image in this section.I do not see how the Kalendar image is seen as any more or less of an advertising image than any others. For ultimately, we do believe it enhances the article. It was accepted at one point (it had been placed in a picture box like all the others). We hope this inclusion can be made again. Cher-anne Nash, Kalendar, April 1/06 9:00am EllisCHanna 14:55, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Coffeehouse"