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. Majorly 21:22, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pacha[edit]

Pacha (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Deleted and protected by me on G11 basis per tag, undeleted per request. There is a history of promotion for this entity as per the deletion log and per things like this (see what's been removed). Underlying this is a concern for corporate notability. WP:SPAM, WP:CORP, WP:COI. Procedural, abstain. - crz crztalk 15:45, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Not to mention severe WP:NPOV problems. Delete until third-party reliable sources are given which validate the claims in the article. I'm not sure why this is even in AfD in the first place - G11 doesn't have a "automatic DRV clause" like A7 does, and "article deleted on spurious grounds" is not a DRV reason. ColourBurst 15:58, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is per request, not per DRV. I was the deleting admin, and I have chosen to reconsider speedy deletion in favor of discussion. - crz crztalk 16:01, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • That's fine with me, but my !vote still stands. ColourBurst 16:09, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Article has been created and deleted several times previously. I am unfamiliar with these versions. This time I created it based on the German and Spanish language versions as well as Pacha's own web site (and I may have perused several clubbing web sites also in the process) and my knowledge of the enterprise from having visited the Ibiza club twice a few years back. This club is merited as one of the highest-ranking international nightclubs in terms of prestige and it would be leave a vacuum if removed from Wikipedia. __meco 16:18, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment but who does this ranking? If it's "ranked", there must be some organization that does it. ColourBurst 18:00, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • I should have refrained from using the contentious term ranked which quite correctly warrants an authority to perform the ranking. I am sure such authorities exist but I'm not privvy to this information. To rephrase myself, among club goers it has been considered one of the most prestigious nightclubs in the world (no source). __meco 21:42, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete unless reliable sources can be provided and the spam nature removed. Nuttah68 19:26, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - One of the most famous clubs in the world, and now a successful franchise with venues worldwide. This needs expansion, not deletion. - hahnchen 21:44, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That you proclaim it so doesn't really count as evidence - do you have third-party sources not related to the club's website to back this up?--Dmz5*Edits**Talk* 06:34, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just assume good faith here, I have absolutely no affiliation with the Pacha company. This is an international brand, with its own record company, it hosts the worlds top DJs in residence. Meco has some sources below which may be of interest. If you do Google news, you'll find reports of Pacha NYC. As before, the article needs expansion. - hahnchen 21:02, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have absolutely no assumption of bad faith, and sorry if my comment sounded as such, but many arguments on AfD are along the lines of "it's famous" rather than "it's famous per this article in Newsweek and these google results I found." My standard reply to such comments is "that you say it's famous doesn't make it famous." --Dmz5*Edits**Talk* 22:52, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Delete. No reliable sources establishing claims or compliance with WP:CORP. Reads like advertising or spam with puffed-up phrases like "one the world's most celebrated clubbing franchises" and "well-known and prestigious venue". Willing to reconsider if reliable sources are provided and the advertising language is removed. Agent 86 00:50, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep notability is established, but the article needs a re-write to make it encyclopedic. --SunStar Net^talk 13:37, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have done some additions to the article now including a poll from an clubbing magazine rating Pacha Ibiza as the no. 4 most popular nightclub globally. Please consider when you take issue with claims like "world's most celebrated" and "well-known and prestigious" that we are dealing with an entertainment venue that caters to a high degree to the world of supermodels, music and fashion industry executives and promoters and international jetset personalities. In this light these terms should be considered intrinsic, not inflated hype. __meco 16:29, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong Keep. This is a prime example of an AfD nomination on charges of "advertising" and "non-notability" based on sheer ignorance. Pacha is definitely a renowned nightclub chain (and certainly one of the most famous nightclubs in my country Spain)—the DJ Magazine ranking provided by User:Meco should make this clear to those nominators around here who know nothing about what they rush to AfD. Uaxuctum 14:30, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please Assume Good Faith and avoid the personal attacks. It's not the job of the nominator to verify the hyperbole. All the revisions show is that a magazine has decided this club is number 4 on its list. If the advertising claims were justified, it would have been number one. Agent 86 01:01, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Article asserts the company's notablilty and references back that up (good work, meco). --Oakshade 04:53, 16 January 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.