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 keep. Per the later uncontested sources. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 17:17, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

George Street Co-op[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable, fails WP:ORG and a search reveals very few sources, not enough to establish notability. Rusf10 (talk) 07:12, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 09:33, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 09:34, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 09:35, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep A search reveals plenty of good sources. The nomination is false. Andrew D. (talk) 18:38, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your assessment of the sources is false. There are very few sources that have more than a passing mention.--Rusf10 (talk) 19:52, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, - Added another source and working on a few more from the local NJ news outlets. C. W. Gilmore (talk) 19:55, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sources are detailed below. Told you so .Andrew D. (talk) 07:52, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep -Notable and reliably sourced, even if it is currently a stub, that is no reason for deletion. C. W. Gilmore (talk) 18:50, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Questions for nominator 1) We've heard from participants here who have found sources, yet there is no apparent effort to have complied with WP:BEFORE. Where is the analysis of potential sources and alternatives to improve the article? Simply asserting that "Your assessment of the sources is false", without any evidence of an appropriate good-faith effort to find sources, accomplishes nothing. 2) The header for this AfD -- and every other one in Wikipedia -- states that the nominator must "... consider alternatives to deletion. If you think the article could be a disambiguation page, redirected or merged to another article, then consider recommending "Disambiguation", "Redirect" or "Merge" instead of deletion. Similarly, if another editor has proposed an alternative to deletion but you think the article should be deleted instead, please elaborate why." Why has the nominator not considered a merge / redirect? Alansohn (talk) 20:17, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Okay genius, what is the merge/redirect target for this one, I give up. Do not tell me its New Brunswick, New Jersey because it certainly is not a major part of that city. A few local newspaper articles that amount to little more than a restaurant review does not clear the bar for WP:GNG A **WP:BEFORE** search didn't reveal much else. So unless you or someone else want to add better references to the article or post them here, do NOT claim that I did not do a before search. I have a theory that you actually copied and pasted your response here without looking at the sources.--Rusf10 (talk) 22:21, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Okay genius"?!?! What's wrong with you? Is this how you believe Wikipedia operates? Alansohn (talk) 05:55, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And you were supposed to assume good faith about my nomination, but you never do. And in this case you accused me of not doing a WP:BEFORE search, but there are zero reliable sources with significant coverage. I'm still waiting for you to find them to back up your statement that I didn't do a search.--Rusf10 (talk) 06:09, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedily Keep as per WP:DGFA. This is another "I have the right to nominate articles on New Jersey and nearby states" nomination. The nominator has attempted the outing of a New Jersey editor and claimed "I have not provided any information [that was] not volunteered in the past." Never mind that the nominator has been previously explicitly warned to not attempt outing. The nominator has told the target of his/her attempted outing, "quite frankly I do not care what you think" The nominator has gotten an editor from a topic related to New Jersey indeffed for being an AfD meatpuppet. The nominator took two editors from New Jersey to ANI on 23 December 2017, which is where some editors became aware that the nominator has said, "List of people from Teaneck, New Jersey should not exist and neither should about half the articles on that list." Challenged about nominating New Jersey articles, in this diff, the nominator accuses a creator of New Jersey articles of creating "unnecessary articles". Unscintillating (talk) 05:10, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Cunard below. Delete or at the least move to draft - Does not appear to have significant non-trivial coverage in reliable secondary sources that would merit an encyclopedia article per WP:NCORP. If there is no coverage of a local business beyond its mere existence it does not merit an article. Also the part about articles of incorporation, structure, etc. is patently unfit for an encyclopedia article. —DIYeditor (talk) 20:21, 20 January 2018 (UTC) Changed. 01:21, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, not after you gutted the article, there is almost nothing left at all. C. W. Gilmore (talk) 21:59, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No what? Usually "no" is in direct response to some assertion. I didn't remove anything that had to do with non-trivial coverage in reliable secondary sources beyond the mere existence of a local business. If the copy-pasted articles of incorporation were the guts of the article that's the exact problem. —DIYeditor (talk) 22:08, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this is a single organic grocery store. While there's apparently a plethora of excessively-detailed information about the corporate structure available, there's nothing that suggests there's notability above other individual grocery stores. power~enwiki (π, ν) 03:19, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Merge / Redirect to New Brunswick, New Jersey There's not enough here - yet - to merit a standalone article, but a merge / redirect would be consistent with WP:BEFORE / WP:PRESERVE. Alansohn (talk) 06:17, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

~~Okay we're making progress here.~~ Now the problem with that merge target is I don't understand how a business gets mentioned in an article about a city. That would be a failure of WP:NOTDIR and possibly WP:NOTTRAVEL (since it has a restaurant).--Rusf10 (talk) 06:34, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with Rusf10 here, how are we supposed to mention every grocery store in a town without some clearly significant coverage in secondary sources? Even without the notability requirement for articles, the requirements for reliable sources and due weight stand. —DIYeditor (talk) 06:35, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per DIY.Doesn't even merit an redirect.AD and Unscintillating may be requested to provide the sources that gives significant coverage about the subject, lest one gets tbanned prior to the opportunity. Winged Blades^Godric 12:32, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep There are at least two references that (just about) meet the criteria for establishing notability. I have reservations about the references. For example, the Vegan Times is a college-produced newspaper and may be critisised based on WP:AUD but my opinion is that is meets the criteria as it is intellectually independent and in-depth. I also believe that this inclusion in a book on "Food Lovers' Guide to New Jersey" also meets the criteria, just about, since it is slightly more than inclusion in a list of similar businesses as there is also some information on the business. It's weak, I know, but I believe it just about creeps over the line. HighKing⁺⁺ 19:55, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep the two references look good to me, and just make GNG standards. --RAN (talk) 04:04, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. What sources are there are passing mentions or, basically, directory listings. That's not my idea of in-depth needed for more than a business listing. --Calton | Talk 06:19, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~ -- a nn grocery store. The sources in the article or at this AfD do not meet WP:CORPDEPTH / WP:AUD (i.e. college newspaper) and there's nothing better. K.e.coffman (talk) 05:33, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 09:32, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in reliable sources.
1. Genovese, Peter (2012). Food Lovers' Guide to® New Jersey: The Best Restaurants, Markets & Local Culinary Offerings. Guilford, Connecticut: Rowman & Littlefield. p. 118. ISBN 0762788941. Retrieved 2018-01-29.
  The article notes:
  George Street Co-op, 89 Morris St., New Brunswick; (732) 247-8280; www.georgestreetcoop.com. This venerable downtown New Brunswick institution has been around forever, or so it seems. It started in 1973, when some students from the Vegetarian Club at Rutgers University opened a buying club in a garage off George Street. They soon moved to a small storefront on George Street. The co-op is now located in even bigger quarters on nearby Morris Street. The co-op's aim is to sell vegetarian foods with the least amount of processing and contaminants but with the greatest nutritional value possible. Anyone can shop at the store, which is stocked with organic produce, organic whole grains, breads and cereals, low-carb foods, chips and natural treats, juice and juicers, ready-to-eat sandwiches and entrees, and many other items. Membership is $24 a year. If you work 2 hours a month at the co-op, you get a 6 percent discount. If you work 2 hours a week, you get 15 percent off. And the co-op offers a 5 percent everyday discount to those 65 and over. The co-op is open daily.
2. Turner, Patricia C. (1990-06-28). "Co-Op Survives in New Brunswick, But No Longer on George Street". The Star-Ledger. Archived from the original on 2018-01-29. Retrieved 2018-01-29.
  The article notes:
  Whatever the excesses and extravagances of the 1980s me-first period, the George Street Co-op in New Brunswick not only managed to survive, it prospered with its philosophy of "community and fellowship in a cooperative environment."
  In fact, the co-op members were able to buy their own building, hence the George Street Co-op is no longer in a storefront on George Street but is at 89 Morris St.
  ...
  The co-op has approximately 600 members who pay $10 a year plus $2 for printing the newsletter. New members pay a $5 deposit, which is returned if they leave.
  Anyone receiving financial assistance can ask to have the dues waived. The co-op accepts food stamps.
  Each co-op member family must work two hours a month for each member of the family. This work could be writing the newsletter, helping in the store, checking in orders, bagging produce, filling bulk bins, taking out trash or other duties, depending on the day and time.
3. Locastro, Jane (1998-10-01). "Vegetarian co-op on the grow with members in the hundreds". The Star-Ledger. Archived from the original on 2018-01-29. Retrieved 2018-01-29.
  The article notes:
  According to its brochure, the co-op was begun in 1973 "when about 10 people from the Vegetarian Club at Rutgers started a buying club and worked out of a garage off George Street."
  A year later, the club moved to a storefront on George Street. In the spring of 1988, the store moved to its present location at 89 Morris St.
  In addition to providing produce which is organic (grown without the use of pesticides or chemical additives), the George Street Co-op carries a range of vegetarian food that includes grains and nuts, herbs, spices, pasta, dairy products, pasta, teas, and ready-to-eat sandwiches. The store also sells books and body-care products.
4. George, Dana Yvette (1996-03-12). "Partnership comes naturally for vegetarian co-op". The Star-Ledger. Archived from the original on 2018-01-29. Retrieved 2018-01-29.
  The article notes:
  Members pay an annual $10 fee, which includes $2 for the co-op's monthly Food For Thought newsletter, in addition to a one-time $5 deposit which is refundable when membership is terminated. The bulk of the dues covers salaries for the eight full-time workers and overhead.
  ...
  The co-op's founding members started a buying club 23 years ago in a garage off George Street, moving within a year into a leased storefront. As the operation expanded, the co-op was able to purchase its own building on Morris Street but retained the George Street name.
5. McEnery, Mary Ann (1994-10-26). "Sharing the Health Co-Ops Grow With Surge in Natural Foods". The Record. Archived from the original on 2018-01-29. Retrieved 2018-01-29.
  The article notes:
  The George Street Co-Op in New Brunswick with 600 members, the state's largest was founded 20 years ago by a g roup of residents in conjunction with the Rutgers Vegetarian Club and the owner of a restaurant and health food store. Woods, who started working there as a volunteer when he was 11 and is now the manager, said the store has outgrown its storefront location on Morris Street. (It moved from George Street in 1988 but kept the name.)
6. Kressel, Beth (2004-06-23). "A threat to fruits of their labors - Co-op vies with mainstream organic goods". The Star-Ledger. Archived from the original on 2018-01-29. Retrieved 2018-01-29.
  The article notes:
  Long before supermarkets devoted aisle space to organic produce, tofu and free-range chicken, there was the George Street Co-op in New Brunswick.
  Started in 1973 by members of the Vegetarian Club at Rutgers College, the co-op has survived three decades, filling a niche for consumers seeking healthy alternatives.
  But now that organic food has gone mainstream, the co-op is struggling to find its place.
  ...
  The co-op, which moved from George Street to its current location on Morris Street in 1988, is a health food store collectively owned by about 200 members. Each member works a few hours a week or month to receive discounts on products, ranging from tofu and organic vegetables to fragrance-free soaps and paper towels made of 100 percent recycled paper.
  ...
  About 10 years ago, the co-op opened its doors to nonmembers, who now make up 75 percent of the store's sales.
7. Tarabour, Brook (2000-01-05). ""Taste of New Jersey" - Organic co-op keeps idealistic vision alive in New Brunswick". The Star-Ledger. Archived from the original on 2018-01-29. Retrieved 2018-01-29.
  The article notes:
  All that said, what's a 30-year-old, communal, organic-only food cooperative doing in the year 2000?
  Surviving quite nicely, thank you, in hip downtown New Brunswick. With more than 200 members, the not-for-profit George Street Co-op still purchases and sells natural foods the old fashioned way: They vote on it.
  ...
  The co-op makes an intriguing example of how a group of people from all walks of life can join forces to keep an idealistic vision alive for almost three decades, and continue to make it work in today's world.
  Within a year, the membership and demand had grown, and they opened a retail store on George Street. By 1988, the cooperative had expanded to the point where it had to relocate to larger quarters at the present site. The Morris Street store is open to the public, which pays sticker price for more than 4,500 items. By working two hours each month at various jobs, members, who pay $12 per year plus an equity deposit of $100, receive an 8 percent discount. Putting in two hours per week gets you a 20 percent discount.
  ...
  ... There's more at stake than you might think: Last year, sales topped $800,000.
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow George Street Co-op to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 00:54, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

These do not meet WP:CORPDEPTH guidelines. The first is basically a restaurant review (specifically mentioned in CORPDEPTH) and the rest are just local newspaper articles which don't meet WP:AUD.--Rusf10 (talk) 01:45, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I consider the entry in the book to be significant coverage. Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Audience says:

The source's audience must also be considered. Evidence of significant coverage by international or national, or at least regional, media is a strong indication of notability. On the other hand, attention solely from local media, or media of limited interest and circulation, is not an indication of notability; at least one regional, statewide, provincial, national, or international source is necessary.

The Star-Ledger is the largest circulated newspaper in the U.S. state of New Jersey and is based in Newark. It is a statewide or regional newspaper so it passes the guideline.

Cunard (talk) 01:50, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per CunardDjflem (talk) 11:44, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep because WP:HEY, kudos to User:Cunard.E.M.Gregory (talk) 13:44, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Struck out vote above, while I am more than willing to consider a Merge / Redirect to New Brunswick, New Jersey as an alternative to deletion, the scope and breadth of the sources identified by Cunard above demonstrate that the article is notable. It appears that the nominator's claim that "There are very few sources that have more than a passing mention." is in fact incorrect and I hope that now that the sources have been identified which provide in-depth coverage that the nomination will be withdrawn as a show of good faith. Alansohn (talk) 14:48, 30 January 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.