Deletion of Hattie B's Hot Chicken

Comment: I saw the listing here and clicked on the article before reading these comments. I was surely going to !vote "keep" because it is referenced with "Time", "Sports Illustrated", "USA Today", "Washington Post", ''and'' "National Geographic" among others, so that is a wrap right? I came back here, read the  "keep" !vote comment of "Northamerica1000",  with all the reasoning why the article should remain, and it was still a wrap. '''Then''', I read the comments of SwisterTwister, and reread the article. '''OMG! It is the best advertising article Wikipedia could present'''. Just read (or reread) the fantastic |advertising "Reception" section. I want some of that chicken. Take a look at the guideline concerning Wikipedia:Spam|spam, the lack of Wikipedia:Neutral point of view|neutrality, and the rationale (such as great national advertising) for any "keep" !votes are buried beneath several WP:policies and guidelines|policies and guidelines that mandate deletion. This article is so good I still think I would like to try the chicken, but that is probably a red flag also
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTADVERTISING)