Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dining club

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. John254 00:26, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dining club

I removed speedy tag I placed and put the article up for discussion. I can't see how it is particularly a notable subject. Also seems to fail WP:DICTIONARY. Hammer1980·^talk 18:05, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article isn't about a particular club, rather it's about a type of club, very similar to gentlemen's clubs. It cetainly doesn't merit deletion. The tag has obviously been placed without thought by someone who either hasn't read the article properly, or who is ignorant of the existence of such clubs. Such clubs are far more popular in the UK than the US, where they are known as [eating club]]s. However, Eating Clubs has an article, and one which although shorter than the Dining Club article (which after all is only 10 minutes or so old!), hasn't been put up for deletion.

Particularly in the last century, dining clubs were a major institution, and most notable figures in fields such as politics, law, journalism etc. still are. We wouldn't delete the gentlemen's club article would we, and what are dining clubs of not mobile gentlemen's clubs? Grunners 18:10, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't engage in what about X? arguments; they are not useful. --Dhartung | Talk 19:53, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: the topic is notable, however poorly the current article explains that. But please let's have some references. Charles Matthews 19:24, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the dining club idea is a notable one Coccyx Bloccyx 19:43, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. To the extent that these are clubs for adults and eating clubs are for university students that should be dmeonstrated, toherwise a merger is appropriate. --Dhartung | Talk 19:53, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- A merge would not be appropriate. Charles Matthews 23:23, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. A number of notable clubs are listed. An overview of such institutions is notable. This could be expanded to trace the history and social influence of such clubs. This is important, not just notable. - Crosbiesmith 20:42, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Flapdragon 21:25, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — this lists a number of notable dining clubs and is a good stub article. — Jonathan Bowen 22:08, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Has the makings of a good article, as gentlemen's clubs seems to have become. Article already lists several examples notable in themselves; an encyclopedic overview of the concept would be informative. Agree that expansion & referencess are required. --Rodhullandemu (please reply here - contribs) 11:09, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Important social/intellectual/political phenomenon of 18th-19th centuries; still not entirely negligible, even if not in the news much. --Paularblaster 02:09, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, naturally such a generic topic would be notable and worthy of inclusion. RFerreira 07:12, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, as these clubs continue to be mentioned in reports on notable people; expansion of current entry is necessary but merited Robma 21:25, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - While this article is the host of a list of clubs, many have websites. The article is only a brief one, but it ought to remain. I suspect there is room for expansion. I seem to remember literary references in the works of John Buchan the novelist. Peterkingiron 23:44, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I think there are some very notable dining clubs, as the more famous ones have held notable memberships and societies, which go on to shape political policies and socio-economic influence. --Ashley Rovira (talk) 06:38, 9 December 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.