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. Sandstein 09:36, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Darrers[edit]

Darrers (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I can't find any reliable sources anywhere that indicate this meets GNG. I acknowledge the difficulty of finding online sources for a supermarket from the 1970s that went defunct in 2007, but still, you'd think if the store really was one of the first anywhere to introduce a free plastic shopping bag, you'd see evidence of that somewhere.

I checked Google, GBooks, GNews, GScholar, archive.org (text search and metadata), JSTOR, and Questia, using a number of variations on the name, including "Darrers", "darrers store", "darrers stores", "darrer's stores", "darrers bag", and "darrers+ireland". (Updated May 23 to add: I have just checked Newspapers.com and Highbeam despite their American focus, and also found nothing.)

The most I turned up were scans of local newspapers from 40 years ago which mention Darrers in the context of ROUTINE local coverage, and one memorial from an Irish man who complains that his mother bought cheap shoes from Darrers that he hated.

It's not enough for a GNG pass, or any other N pass either. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:54, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any policy-based arguments to support your keep vote, or are you going to stick with ILIKEIT? A bag being included in a local museum is hardly indicative of the kind of significant widespread attention required to pass WP:N. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:39, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
To be honest my answer was pretty tongue-in-cheek. I acknowledge that Darrers has not been written about a huge amount, and there is a lack of sources for it. That said I am an inclusionist, so I will always err that way. I know that histories have been written recently about other local retail institutions such as Hadden's and Shaw's Stores, so I think Darrers time will come. And I wasn't saying that inclusion in the collections of the local museum should argue for its retention, but that it might offer a source for being the first store to give out a free bag! I would say that it has an Irish notability, and given that retail in Ireland is poorly represented on-Wiki, I would be disappointed to see one of the few articles go. Smirkybec (talk) 11:17, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
We don't evaluate articles based on the hope that there may be sources in the future, we evaluate them based on what's available presently, and right now (as even you acknowledge), there isn't enough to keep the article. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 20:40, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Again, I implore you to produce any kind of source whatsoever that validates that claim. You cannot simply assume that sources must exist, you have to actually provide some evidence that they exist in order for your argument to be taken seriously by the closing administrator. I take some offense to the claim that my nomination was hasty - I made extensive searches through a number of databases as indicated in my nomination. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 14:47, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The best I could find to support that claim: http://www.igp-web.com/Carlow/Tullow_St_04.htm . I'm inclined to believe that it is true. Tazerdadog (talk) 08:05, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It says a lot that an unverified personal recollection on a personal website with no editorial oversight is the best evidence available to support "notability" for this store. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 08:35, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 05:51, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 05:51, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. North America1000 12:15, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 07:24, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The fact that "a few, better, reliable links are needed" is the whole crux of this AfD. Actually, it's the crux of almost any AfD and doesn't particularly need pointing out. As I noted in my nomination and in several follow-up comments, if I had been able to find any reliable sources in the first place, I would've added them, and if anyone else could, they would've produced them some time in the past two weeks. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 10:19, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Addendum. I have added several of the many refs I found to the article. I would also offer (to the "there is no coverage" argument) the cover of "The Nationalist" from 24 Sep 2004 for example. Alongside mass-graves, robbery and Daniel Day Lewis, they made the closure of Darrers a "front page" topic. OK. It's not exactly the New York Times. Or the Washington Post. Or even The Irish Times. But still :) Guliolopez (talk) 18:14, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Almost all the sources you have added to the article are trivial at best and do not meet any of the criteria of WP:RS, let alone the more stringent criteria of WP:NCORP. The first one is an obituary of the owner not a discussion of the store, the second is a business listing which never contributes to notability, the third is a copy of the source Tazerdadog posted which I pointed out as unreliable above, the fourth is a classified ad mentioning a lost Darrers bag which obviously has no bearing on any claim of notability, the fifth is pretty much the only reliable source although it's a regional paper so that doesn't contribute much in the way of notability, the sixth is a tweet from a museum which I have already pointed out does not support notability, the seventh is entirely about something else and the words "From the Darrers bag" are the only part of it that concerns Darrers, and the eighth is a local source.
So the only two sources you have presented that aren't utterly trivial are local, which fail the portion of WP:N that requires "significant attention by the world at large" (typically taken to mean national coverage at a minimum). ♠PMC♠ (talk) 05:00, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 09:25, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Response to PMC from above "relisting" fold. Hi PMC. A few quick notes:

Mine is still a "keep". Cheers. Guliolopez (talk) 21:11, 4 June 2018 (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.
More