Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Underground HK
Reserving judgement for now until I've looked into it more to determine notability. I'm leaning in the direction of keep. Mainly, because the existing bulleted bibliography-style refs, South China Morning Post, Time Out etc, at first glance appear to give non-trivial coverage. All that said, I'm in general agreement with DGG's advertisement point. Without the encouraging—if underused—bulleted refs, I very probably would've plumped for deletion ().&nbsp;-- Special:Contributions/91.125.29.135|91.125.29.135
— [[User talk:91.125.29.135|talk]]), 23:25, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:TNT (Wikipedia:Blow it up and start over)