Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zupan's Markets

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
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. Passions ran high in this discussion, and strong arguments were raised by both sides. But in the end, participants could not reach a rough consensus about whether the sources establish sufficient notability to meet our guidelines. Owen× 23:55, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zupan's Markets

Zupan's Markets (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Hyper-local niche family owned grocery store with mere three stores in the Portland, Oregon metro area. Fails

WP:NCORP Coverages are all routine and hyper-local. Graywalls (talk) 02:52, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:22, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete This is a company therefore GNG/
    HighKing++ 11:51, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× 17:02, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. Part of the problem appears to be that the article currently overfocuses on the Portland grocery stores owned by Zupan's Markets. In the 1990s, Zupan's Markets was based in Vancouver, Washington, and operated many other stores in both Washington and Oregon, including Food World and Food Pavilion stores. The 1994 opening of the Food World in Cascade Park to much fanfare (as a Costco-like store without membership with rollerskating staff...in the midst of a grocery workers' strike), followed by its closure one year later and subsequent sale to Safeway, is interesting and well covered by the business section of local newspapers. Cielquiparle (talk) 03:17, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Cielquiparle and Another Believer have added additional content and citations to bulk up the article. I urge those who voted "Delete" to have another look at it and see if that's still their stance. Constablequackers (talk) 09:16, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Constablequackers Don't hold your breath. Up to 47 sources, but I doubt anyone would want to revisit or take the time to put together a source assessment table. ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:40, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well, hang in there. The deletionists and overthinkers around here have discouraged me from working on no less than a dozen Portland related pages. Wanted to create a few, update others, etc. It's a total drag. Such a shame that so many editors are more interested in being pedantic and bickering over incredibly minute nuances of wiki-regulations with the passion of a lawyer in the final chapters of a John Grisham novel instead of, you know, sharing knowledge with the world, which is what this site is supposed to be all about. Unbelievably tedious. Constablequackers (talk) 10:12, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete lean towards deletion of the page; no sufficient reliable sources + the lack of general notability. --Rodgers V (talk) 12:07, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: Per their Talk page, the above user was blocked indefinitely for promotional editing. Cielquiparle (talk) 23:24, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
off-topic
  • Keep per
    WP:IDONTLIKEIT and you feel that only national chains like Safeway, Albertson's, Trader Joe's, and Whole Foods deserve Wikipedia articles, there is nothing I can do; but if your objection is to the gushingly positive descriptions of Zupan's or the "gentrification" of the food industry, I've tried to include some critique of Zupan's to balance out the otherwise rather favorable descriptions of the business. (But I fully expect it might not stand.) Cielquiparle (talk) 12:49, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]
The most in-depth articles on
WP:TL;DR. We differ in opinion. Let other people make up their own minds. Cielquiparle (talk) 06:17, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
Additional sources have been identified and an ATD suggested, so in the spirit of a collaborative discussion, and because we operate from a baseline assumption of good faith, including that editors can change their minds based on new evidence and ideas, I considered the sources and the suggested ATD.
Source review
As to new sources presented:
  • the TIME magazine mention is not
    substantial coverage
    of the company, this is a brief mention in a report about Oregon politics and Portlandia
  • the 1996 mention in Progressive Grocer about having fruit samples is an example listed by a produce merchandiser and is one sentence about Zupan's, so also not substantial coverage
  • the 2017 Oregon Business source is not
    significant coverage of the company itself
    , but instead a brief report that seems more focused on the building, the neighborhood, and new development
  • I agree with HighKing that the 1999 Hero or villain? Zupan's blunders ignite passions source about an upcoming liquor license administrative hearing, with substantial quotes from Zupan's attorney is not substantial coverage to support notability per NCORP; we're not looking for a platonic ideal of coverage, but instead a level of depth and independence to allow us to develop encyclopedic content that is not advertising or a directory entry
  • Eater Seattle quoting a commenter in a brief post about Zupan's is also not significant coverage of the company
  • the 1996 Portland Business Journal is a bizjournals.com source that I discussed in a comment above; a promotional publication, and this source is substantially based on what John Zupan says about himself, what a "Business associate and racing buddy" says, what a close friend of Zupan's says, what Mike Zupan Zupan, etc - not independent content that can support notability
  • the Columbian "Fresh Thinking: Michael Zupan takes his parents' Vancouver-based grocery chain to new level" source is substantially based on statements from Michael Zupan, John Zupan, the landlord of one of the stores, and an architect who works with Zupan's - this is not
    independent content
    that can support notability
  • there are several sources related to the crash that killed John Zupan, including related criminal proceedings that do not support notability for the company, and the Oregonian source noted in this discussion is substantially based on quotes from people connected to John Zupan, and has some biographical content - even if this was substantially independent, the company does not
    inherit notability
    from an owner.

As to the suggested ATD, while

WP:BASIC anticipates significant coverage could be developed by a combination of independent, reliable, secondary sources, this does not seem supported because the same challenge for developing encyclopedic content on this company and biographies of its owners appears to be the limited and often promotional sourcing that is available at this time. Beccaynr (talk) 16:30, 24 March 2024 (UTC) - updated comment to fix typo, expand source review Beccaynr (talk) 13:39, 26 March 2024 (UTC) [reply
]

@Beccaynr:, I too consiedered ATD, but with company articles, unless there's a parent company, finding the appropriate merge target isn't always possible. Graywalls (talk) 17:31, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@
WP:ATD. Cielquiparle (talk) 06:27, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
@
content forking to game the system to retain a CORP article that may not pass NCORP Graywalls (talk) 07:05, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
@
WP:AGF. It is a sincere attempt to offer a solution for those that think Zupan's Markets should be deleted. Cielquiparle (talk) 07:13, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
@Graywalls To confirm, if the article is merged and redirected to John Zupan, it should not be retained in its full form. Another alternative would be to merge and redirect to John and Mike Zupan, but in my experience, many editors struggle with the existence of double biographies even when they are siblings or married couples. In this case, it would be a BLP-plus-non-BLP. IMO of the two, John Zupan seems more notable (plus he's the eponymous founder). Cielquiparle (talk) 09:19, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I personally don't agree with creating an "anchor" bio article to be used to retain a company article that may not pass NCORP. I am also not certain John Zupan merits meets
WP:ANYBIO. I've not put time into investigating. Graywalls (talk) 09:14, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
@Graywalls As I said in an above paragraph, I'm OK with redirecting John Zupan to Zupan's Markets. Maybe there is no need to have two separate articles. I just thought it was helpful to "see" it so we could decide accordingly. Cielquiparle (talk) 10:11, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cielquiparle:I have looked at your addition about plastic bag. This is tangential mention of Zupan's and pure fluff of no real substance.Graywalls (talk) 21:25, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Graywalls Yes exactly! I wasn't putting it forward as evidence of in-depth coverage. I was simply presenting the TIME magazine mention as evidence that it's not true that no one has ever heard of Zupan's Markets outside Portland. While the Belmont store was still open, many travel guides (and the travel section of the Arizona Daily Star for example) specifically mentioned it as the "real location" of that Portlandia TV sketch too. By itself, it wouldn't justify keeping the article, no. Cielquiparle (talk) 21:51, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We're not making patties. No amount of trimmings that can be ground up replaces a large thick piece of steak even though they might be able to make large hamburger patties. Graywalls (talk) 01:00, 26 March 2024 (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.