Deletion of M1NT

Comment: As pointed out above, there are reliable sources in which M1NT is the primary subject of the article.  As such, it meets the .  Addtionally, one can find even more coverage where, alhtough M1NT is not the primary subject, the coverage is more than just a passing mention.  For example: http://www.cnngo.com/shanghai/drink/bar-and-clubs-are-just-so-shanghai-516493
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: The rationale oesn't Suck As Bad as Some Stuff doesn't cut it for me. There needs to be a very high bar for inclusion of small private businesses, otherwise WP will quickly come to resemble the Yellow Pages. This is a promotional fluff piece which smells as though the club had a role in its writing. That's not good enough. If there is material out there which demonstrates this firm's encyclopedia-worthiness, it needs to be showing in the article. Not theoretically "out there," for a commercial concern, notability needs to be ''showing in the piece'' and ad spam removed at once. In my opinion, just as we treat Biographies of Living People differently than Biographies of Historic Figures, we need to treat commercial pages of small firms differently than pages relating to large corporations. If we don't hold these pages to a rigorous and high standard, there will be negative consequences for the project down the road when the onslaught of 50 million businesses or whatever around the world begins. Wikipedia should not be allowed to become a part of any company's marketing program
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Disambiguation (WP:D)

Comment: by nominator.  What independent coverage? A few examples would really help. The last time I looked all I found was their own Web site, which as a |self-published source isn't helpful for testing notability
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (WP:SELF)