Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/"200 Great Gay Bars"
on the basis of an uneven bulk nomination without prejudice to renominating individual articles. My kneejerk reaction was closer to delete (or userfy/draftify until AB expressed disinterest in that), but looking at the sources available (primarily those linked by {{u|Another Believer}} above), it's clear there's a case for notability for at least a couple of them. Since that's the case, the blanket deletion rationale must be something along the lines of  (or , but that doesn't look to apply to all of them, if it applies at all, and those which do have the quotes can be fixed pretty easily) and/or . This doesn't look like a  to me, but nor am I sold on all of these being appropriate. This is why I tend not to like bulk nominations -- because when they're not more or less interchangeable, the discussion gets messy. So I'd like to see these nominated individually, because there are at least a couple I'd be !voting weak keep or keep on. &mdash
— User:Rhododendrites, 02:45, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:NOTDIRECTORY||WP:COPYVIO||WP:TNT||WP:TNT (Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not)