Deletion of Little Anita's

Comment: you didn't look very hard either, more reviews and travel guides, none of which establish ote|notability as established in . You are missing the point regarding proper sourcing for restaurants- reviews, best of lists, directories, now open listings and all other outine coverage only provides that the place is erifiable. You need quality sources that are about the chain, not the poor quality listings that you have provided. You need articles that are about the chain, and when I say about the chain I mean articles that discuss its history in depth, it business model and other structures related to it. These other sources you keep adding aren't worth the paper they were printed on regarding notability. Remember that sources that are reliable do not automatically confer notability to a subject simply because said source is inherently reliable. You need quality, not quantity, and so far you have not provided the required quality sources
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:CORPDEPTH||WP:R||WP:V)

Comment: The chain(s) do not meet the standards of otability as established in  because all the sources provided fall under outine or are rimary. They consist almost exclusively of reviews, listings from travel guides, or from local business directories; not one of the sources is actually about the company itself. Yes some of the sources provided are unto themselves S|reliable, the reliability of the source does not connote automatic notability on the subject. While the company is local and local chains can be notable, these sources are not sufficient to prove its notability, which means it has to go
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:CORPDEPTH||WP:R||WP:P||WP:RS)